Seceeding from the Union

[starshiptrooper]

No, no it wasn’t treason. Treason would be forcibly disrupting the lawful representatives of the people you are sworn to serve from carrying out their duties, especially in a time of war.

Unfortunately for you, the Constitutution defines treason in Article 3 Section to consist of fight agains the US, adhering to enemies of the US, or giving them aid and comfort. Arresting legislators who discuss secession does not fall under this definition.

So if I get what you’re saying right, the fact that they didn’t line up in a row to be shot at means they are guerrillas, and therefore it is okay to wage total war and murder civilians. You are a champion of moral theology.

Sherman was fighting against an enemy that was using hit and run tactics. The only way to defeat people who do this is to cut off their supplies.

I) Pearl harbor was not at the opening of Tokyo bay. II) America was not trying to unlawfully tax Japanese trade from Pearl Harbor. III) Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack. The confederates, on the other hand, had made numerous attempts to buy Fort Sumter or to make other peaceable arrangements to obtain it and had warned the union Garrison before the attack. IV)

Your first and third and fourth points are completely irrelevant. Your second point depends on the legality of secession, you have not proved that yet.

By suggesting that all American actions against the Japanese during WWII were justified, (I’m thinking of two in particular) I think you graduated from Champion moral theologian to Doctor of the Faith.

No need to be nasty. I have said nothing about the A-bombs, but I think dropping them was the right decision. We should discuss this somewhere else though, otherwise this thread will be locked.

No i’m referring to Lee’s letters and conduct after the war.*

It is possible SCOTUS was wrong, they have been before and since, but that doesn’t mean the president can just ignore their ruling.

The Constitution explicity states that Habeas Corpus may be suspended under certain circumstances.

See above, and recalibrate your moral compass.

No need to be insulting.

Okay if we haven’t left off of this subject let’s consider this, Pearl Harbor was the first step in a series of aggressive actions against the US on US territory.

Just like the attack on Fort Sumter.

Further, after the war, Japan was allowed to remain a sovereign nation even keeping it’s Emperor, but terms of surrender were somewhat different for the south,

Irrelevant, the analogy was between Pearl Harbor and Fort Sumter, not the entire Civil War and WWII.

except for the fact that in both cases it was understood that the US would murder more civilians and destroy more cities if their demands weren’t met.

The demands were just and the US was not intentionally murdering civilians in either case.

To me? It is not and I roundly condemn it, but it was hardly the primary motivation for the war.

Read the Declarations of Secession that the Southern States issued, of particular interest are Mississippi’s Texas’ and Georgia’s Declarations of Secession. If you want, I can post the relevant quotes, for your convenience. Here is fun one from the Texan statement.

In all the non-slave-holding States, in violation of that good faith and comity which should exist between entirely distinct nations, the people have formed themselves into a great sectional party, now strong enough in numbers to control the affairs of each of those States, based upon the unnatural feeling of hostility to these Southern States and their beneficent and patriarchal system of African slavery, proclaiming the debasing doctrine of the equality of all men, irrespective of race or color–a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of the Divine Law. They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and the negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.

To the North? Because the slave trade was a thriving northern industry

,Almost everything in your first link is irrelevant, importing slaves was outlawed by the year 1800 according the Constitution. Slave smuggling was not an industry.

and because slave labor provided the north with (Among other things) cotton for northern textile mills;

The North destroyed the cotton trade after the Civil War by outlawing slavery. Therefore this could not have been a motive for going to war.

*This and the letters of Lee are in books I do not have on me at present, but I will post back with them soon. I’m sorry if my LMGTFY offended you, but I was pointing out that it was so far from disputed that the first Google page was filled from top to bottom with sources on that subject. Would you prefer I open each search result and post the URLs here next time?

That is what should have been doing in the first place.

To tide you over till I dig up said quotes I’ll provide yiu with the following…

Try reading your own quote next time. I noticed that Lincoln did not use the term ‘secession’, he specifically said he was talking about the right of revolution.

 

[Reep]

I guess this talk comes because of the election - its funny people who claim to believe so much in democracy are ready toss it aside when the election doesn’t go they way they want.The people have spoken.Some times it doesn’t go the way you want - you wait for the next election and change can come.

True enough, at the moment the liberals have laid the whip to conservative backs. Conservatives, in turn, dream of getting the whip back at the next election. It’s a very old story.

Many others, including myself, question wanting to hold the whip at all. In view of massive government theft, sanctioned child-murder and the many wars, sometimes you wonder if our’s is the best system.

http://freeisbeautiful.net/wp-content/uploads/Aztecs.jpg

 

[GEddie]

True enough, at the moment the liberals have laid the whip to conservative backs. Conservatives, in turn, dream of getting the whip back at the next election. It’s a very old story.

Many others, including myself, question wanting to hold the whip at all. In view of massive government theft, sanctioned child-murder and the many wars, sometimes you wonder if our’s is the best system.

http://freeisbeautiful.net/wp-content/uploads/Aztecs.jpg

It’s the best system we have available.

Direct democracy is undoable with a large population, the cutoff precisely unknown, but far less than our 310 million people.

Monarchy eliminates passing the whip from side to side by giving that whip permanently to one family. Historically, monarchy has also been no more reluctant to go to war than representative government.

Few other permutations are practical.

Shalom, ICXC NIKA

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Unfortunately for you, the Constitutution defines treason in Article 3 Section to consist of fight agains the US, adhering to enemies of the US, or giving them aid and comfort. Arresting legislators who discuss secession does not fall under this definition.

Okay, and how does discussing secession count by that definition? They aren’t adhering to enemies of the US, they are discussing leaving the US.

Sherman was fighting against an enemy that was using hit and run tactics. The only way to defeat people who do this is to cut off their supplies.

They weren’t using hit and run tactics; they were entrenched. Even if they were “Cutting off supply lines” is not the same as burning the crops, food stores, and cities, or murdering civilians.

Your first and third and fourth points are completely irrelevant. Your second point depends on the legality of secession, you have not proved that yet.

Where does the US constitution prohibit secession? If you cannot answer then it is proved.

The Constitution explicity states that Habeas Corpus may be suspended under certain circumstances.

Circumstances which the Supreme Court said were not present.

Just like the attack on Fort Sumter.

It was not until after Lee took the helm that the confederate armies stepped foot on union land.

Irrelevant, the analogy was between Pearl Harbor and Fort Sumter, not the entire Civil War and WWII.

You said that just like pearl Harbor the conquest was justified, but we didn’t conquer Japan we just defeated them, so it is relevant.

The demands were just and the US was not intentionally murdering civilians in either case.

It was going to be completely on accident? In both cases war crimes were committed and the threat of further crimes was used as leverage to force surrender.

Read the Declarations of Secession that the Southern States issued, of particular interest are Mississippi’s Texas’ and Georgia’s Declarations of Secession. If you want, I can post the relevant quotes, for your convenience. Here is fun one from the Texan statement

I’m surprised you didn’t use Alabama’s which mentions slavery directly. What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? That still doesn’t make slavery the primary motivation for secession, and I have already stated that it was on the top three reasons.

Almost everything in your first link is irrelevant, importing slaves was outlawed by the year 1800 according the Constitution. Slave smuggling was not an industry.

Well that’s strange, because ships out of Maryland, Rhode Island, and several other New England states were still doing it until after the war.

The North destroyed the cotton trade after the Civil War by outlawing slavery. Therefore this could not have been a motive for going to war.

It would likely not have been so if Lincoln had not been assassinated. Remember that he did not free slaves in northern slave states and used emancipation as a way to re-frame a riotously unpopular war as a mission of abolition. After the war, when he wouldn’t have draft riots, he would have returned things to their previous state of affairs.
"Abraham Lincoln:

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it”

That is what should have been doing in the first place.

Will do.

Try reading your own quote next time. I noticed that Lincoln did not use the term ‘secession’, he specifically said he was talking about the right of revolution.

Try reading my quote again
"Abraham Lincoln:

Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.

If it is right to overthrow your own government to establish yourself as a separate nation, how much more so then to secede legally on the authority of your own government.

starshiptrooper:

 

[Reep]

It’s the best system we have available.

Direct democracy is undoable with a large population, the cutoff precisely unknown, but far less than our 310 million people.

Monarchy eliminates passing the whip from side to side by giving that whip permanently to one family. Historically, monarchy has also been no more reluctant to go to war than representative government.

Few other permutations are practical.

Not to argue with the Aztecs, but we can always do better. One “permutation” is to reconstitute authority to a place where it does no more than protect the dignity and rights of people (the “common good”).

As St. Augustine taught in the City of God, peace is the one common desire of all men (whether believers or not). Education, charity and all the rest can be dealt with without anybody having to hold the whip. More at my blog: Beautiful* is*.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Okay, and how does discussing secession count by that definition? They aren’t adhering to enemies of the US, they are discussing leaving the US.

You know darn well that they were talking about join the CSA, not just making their own little nation. Talk like that coming from a leader would definitely be aiding the enemy.

They weren’t using hit and run tactics; they were entrenched. Even if they were “Cutting off supply lines” is not the same as burning the crops, food stores, and cities, or murdering civilians.

Not all enemies Sherman was fighting were entrenched, some were using hit and run tactics. Cutting of the supply lines implies control or destruction of those supplies.

Where does the US constitution prohibit secession? If you cannot answer then it is proved.

If secession is allowed the Supremacy clause is meaningless. You will find James Madison’s writings on this subject informative.
almostchosenpeople.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/james-madison-on-secession/
press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch3s14.html

Circumstances which the Supreme Court said were not present.

Clearly contradicting the facts. Again it is not particularly suprising that this kangaroo court would rule that way.

It was not until after Lee took the helm that the confederate armies stepped foot on union land.

Fort Sumter.

You said that just like pearl Harbor the conquest was justified, but we didn’t conquer Japan we just defeated them, so it is relevant.

Actually we did conquer Japan, we occupied their nation for years.

It was going to be completely on accident?

Yes.

In both cases war crimes were committed and the threat of further crimes was used as leverage to force surrender.

What war crimes?

I’m surprised you didn’t use Alabama’s which mentions slavery directly. What does this have to do with the price of tea in China? That still doesn’t make slavery the primary motivation for secession, and I have already stated that it was on the top three reasons.

It was the top reason according to those Declarations of Secession. If you deny this, then it seems that you think we should not take legal documents seriously.

Well that’s strange, because ships out of Maryland, Rhode Island, and several other New England states were still doing it until after the war.

Criminal activity, encouraged by the South, and performed by a tiny fraction of the Northern population is hardly an industry.

It would likely not have been so if Lincoln had not been assassinated. Remember that he did not free slaves in northern slave states and used emancipation as a way to re-frame a riotously unpopular war as a mission of abolition. After the war, when he wouldn’t have draft riots, he would have returned things to their previous state of affairs.

You can’t prove your last statement.

Try reading my quote again.

Try undestanding your own quote.

If it is right to overthrow your own government to establish yourself as a separate nation, how much more so then to secede legally on the authority of your own government.

Non-sequitur. Once again, revolution and secession are two different things and the Constitution does not allow secession.

 

[Mar044]

You know darn well that they were talking about join the CSA, not just making their own little nation. Talk like that coming from a leader would definitely be aiding the enemy.Not all enemies Sherman was fighting were entrenched, some were using hit and run tactics. Cutting of the supply lines implies control or destruction of those supplies.
If secession is allowed the Supremacy clause is meaningless. You will find James Madison’s writings on this subject informative.
almostchosenpeople.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/james-madison-on-secession/
press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch3s14.htmlClearly contradicting the facts. Again it is not particularly suprising that this kangaroo court would rule that way.Fort Sumter.Actually we did conquer Japan, we occupied their nation for years.Yes.What war crimes?It was the top reason according to those Declarations of Secession. If you deny this, then it seems that you think we should not take legal documents seriously. Criminal activity, encouraged by the South, and performed by a tiny fraction of the Northern population is hardly an industry.You can’t prove your last statement.Try undestanding your own quote.Non-sequitur. Once again, revolution and secession are two different things and the Constitution does not allow secession.

no…you dropped two nukes on japan, and they surrendered, but there was no occupation, the country was free and kept its leaders. it has a army base, nice people…

 

[ThatOrthodoxGuy]

Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

 

[Mar044]

Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

more to that quote you know, also you do know the full history of the patriots right…they just edit out the village killings or other indian oppression you might see in a video game today.
cough assasins creed.

i find it funny that first people had problems with minders in texas, now they want to break away…ironic…just like syria, so how is a landlocked nation going to rise up against a M1 tank and nearly half a million men? no army member is going to follow a governor instead of the president. thats no democracy, thats a uprising when you don’t like the outcome of a election, that isn’t liberty, people had a free voice and elected a leader, as a hole, if you try to break away because you don’t like a outcome then its sad.

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

If secession is allowed the Supremacy clause is meaningless. You will find James Madison’s writings on this subject informative.

Article Six Clause two of the U.S. Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

This is the Supremacy Clause, which means nothing more nor less than what it says. It prohibits nullification, but it says nothing about secession. James Madison was a federalist, and has a federalist reading of the constitution, but that is not the same as those positions being in the constitution. Secession is not only legal, it is a founding principle of the nation.

P.S. No single state you mentioned can speak for the whole of the confederacy, if slavery was the primary purpose then why didn’t any state but Alabama list it as a cause? The closest you get elsewhere is the description of southern slave-holding states, which doesn’t imply that the injury done to said states has anything to do with the fact they hold slaves. Heck, why secede to begin with when there was no challenge to slavery? Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist.

P.P.S By a “Criminal activity… performed by a tiny fraction of the Northern population” do you mean the slave trade which was an exclusively (or at least almost exclusively) northern trade? Southern ships and southern men weren’t generally going to Africa.

 

[Mar044]

This is the Supremacy Clause, which means nothing more nor less than what it says. It prohibits nullification, but it says nothing about secession. James Madison was a federalist, and has a federalist reading of the constitution, but that is not the same as those positions being in the constitution. Secession is not only legal, it is a founding principle of the nation.

P.S. No single state you mentioned can speak for the whole of the confederacy, if slavery was the primary purpose then why didn’t Louisiana say a thing about it? Heck, why secede to begin with when there was no challenge to slavery? Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist.

P.P.S By a “Criminal activity… performed by a tiny fraction of the Northern population” do you mean the slave trade which was an exclusively (or at least almost exclusively) northern trade? Southern ships and southern men weren’t generally going to Africa.

umm you do know why they union and graycoats fought it out right, half agreed and half didn’t

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

umm you do know why they union and graycoats fought it out right, half agreed and half didn’t

Are you referring to agreement with the Tariffs which shut down southern trade to favor northern factories, and make it impractical to sell cotton to foreign textile mills? (Giving northern textile mills the ability to name their own price.) This is the primary reason why the first group of states seceded. Several came after with their own concerns (Including fear that abolitionism would eventually gain traction.) and then finally the last group seceded out of loyalty, not willing to stand by as the North invaded their neighbors.

 

[Mar044]

Are you referring to agreement with the Tariffs which shut down southern trade to favor northern factories, and make it impractical to sell cotton to foreign textile mills? (Giving northern textile mills the ability to name their own price.) This is the primary reason why the first group of states seceded. Several came after with their own concerns (Including fear that abolitionism would eventually gain traction.) and then finally the last group seceded out of loyalty, not willing to stand by as the North invaded their neighbors.

Now I want to go watch the show Jericho again lol

 

[Pat_Albertson]

While it might seem to some that this thread is mostly academic in nature, that view just might be mistaken. Currently showing among the most recent petitions at the We The People Petition site at whitehouse.gov are:
we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of New York to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Colorado to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Allow Oregon to vote on and leave the Union peacefully and remain an ally to the Nation.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of New Jersey to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of North Dakota to withdraw from the USA and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Montana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Indiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Mississippi to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW governmen

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of georgia to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Kentucky to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Florida to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of North Carolina to withdraw from the United States and create its own NEW government

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Alabama to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

:twocents:

 

[ThatOrthodoxGuy]

While it might seem to some that this thread is mostly academic in nature, that view just might be mistaken. Currently showing among the most recent petitions at the We The People Petition site at whitehouse.gov are:
we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Louisiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of New York to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Colorado to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Allow Oregon to vote on and leave the Union peacefully and remain an ally to the Nation.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of New Jersey to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of North Dakota to withdraw from the USA and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Montana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Indiana to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Mississippi to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW governmen

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of georgia to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Kentucky to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Florida to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of North Carolina to withdraw from the United States and create its own NEW government

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Alabama to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

we petition the obama administration to: Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government.

:twocents:

Wow this might be a wake up call:blush:

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

In light of Documents brought recently to my attention I retire the claim that the causes for secession I gave are hierarchically organized. Rather, I now take the position (with a side of crow) that the individual intentions of the several states are just that, individual. The substance of my main argument still stands, but this side argument I concede.

 

[Mar044]

Wow this might be a wake up call:blush:

Ya, i knew that from liveleak.com, only a few thousand want this, a decimal point of the population.

never happen

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Now I want to go watch the show Jericho again lol

Go watch what?

 

[Inego_de_Loyola]

Ya, i knew that from liveleak.com, only a few thousand want this, a decimal point of the population.

never happen

That depends a lot on how the next four years go. We are more and more polarized everyday, as I said in an earlier post a relationship characterized by contempt is already over.

 

[Pat_Albertson]

Ya, i knew that from liveleak.com, only a few thousand want this, a decimal point of the population.

never happen

I think you’re probably correct.

I don’t think it will happen either, but when they reach the magic 25,000 mark, the President will have to respond in some way.

Some have shot up by thousands in just one day, and they have 30 days to make it to 25,000.