Saints Alive Posted December 19, 2012 Author Posted December 19, 2012 I always thought where the constitution is quite the states have the power, so if the constitution is quite on secession than it must be a power of the state. 1
thesometimesaint Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 TAO:We have ample provision within the Constitution to amend it. From the Nullification Crises of the 1830's to the Civil War of the 1860's to the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960's every attempt by the states to override the Federal government has failed. The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land.The USSC says that there is no legal means to leave the Union after admission. 600,000 American dead from the Civil War say there is no legal way to leave.
thesometimesaint Posted December 19, 2012 Posted December 19, 2012 I always thought where the constitution is quite the states have the power, so if the constitution is quite on secession than it must be a power of the state.That is quite a bizarre interpretation of the 10th Amendment, and has never been upheld by the USSC.
Saints Alive Posted December 19, 2012 Author Posted December 19, 2012 That is quite a bizarre interpretation of the 10th Amendment, and has never been upheld by the USSC.How many time have states tried to secede? I can only think of one example.
Scott Lloyd Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 Probably someone else has already corrected you (although it didn't happen on the whole first page of replies), but it's not "succession," it's secession.Yeah, that's been mentioned. As I recall, Saints Alive blamed it on spell check and auto-correct. Which is plausible. That's happened to me before. The perils of the word processor.
Alan Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 This has been interesting. I have discovered that the self appointed champions of democracy are nothing of the sort. So if one of the States held a referrendum on the question of leaving the union, and the vote was in favour of secession, that would count for nothing and the US government would ignore and possibly shoot/bomb/kill the people who wanted it. Have you guys ever heard of the phrase "self-determination"? The US government uses it all the time when it is lecturing the rest of the world on how to conduct their affairs.It seems to me you still have quite a lot to learn from your "mother Gentiles".
thesometimesaint Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 Alan:We're not a democracy. We are a republic, if we can keep it.To do so would be an act of treason.The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of this country. All other attempts at Nullification/Secession/or outright ignoring Federal Law have been met with Court Orders/guns and bombs/Federal Troops.We practically invented the term when we rebelled against Britain in 1776.Like every other great country that has ever existed we have our problems, and plenty of them. However to be lectured by an Empire that once theSun never set on is rather hypocritical.
TAO Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) TAO:We have ample provision within the Constitution to amend it. From the Nullification Crises of the 1830's to the Civil War of the 1860's to the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960's every attempt by the states to override the Federal government has failed.Of course. That's precedence.The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land.The Constitution is seperate from precidence. Again, this is not an issue of the Constitution at all.The USSC says that there is no legal means to leave the Union after admission.Source please?600,000 American dead from the Civil War say there is no legal way to leave.No, it says there is no way to leave unless everybody agrees, right? Edited December 21, 2012 by TAO
thesometimesaint Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) http://www.theblaze....tter-763174.jpgThere is no provision for leaving the Union after admission Period.http://en.wikipedia..../Texas_v._WhiteThis issue is settled law by the USSC, 600,000 dead, and our Pledge of Allegiance. Edited December 21, 2012 by thesometimesaint
Scott Lloyd Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 (edited) This has been interesting. I have discovered that the self appointed champions of democracy are nothing of the sort.So if one of the States held a referrendum on the question of leaving the union, and the vote was in favour of secession, that would count for nothing and the US government would ignore and possibly shoot/bomb/kill the people who wanted it. Have you guys ever heard of the phrase "self-determination"? The US government uses it all the time when it is lecturing the rest of the world on how to conduct their affairs.It seems to me you still have quite a lot to learn from your "mother Gentiles".Alan, we are a union, not a loose collection of colonies.If people can't abide us, they are free to renounce their citizenship and go elsewhere. But as I stated in another post on this thread, they are not free to rob us of our real estate in the process. Edited December 21, 2012 by Scott Lloyd
bluebell Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 This has been interesting. I have discovered that the self appointed champions of democracy are nothing of the sort.So if one of the States held a referrendum on the question of leaving the union, and the vote was in favour of secession, that would count for nothing and the US government would ignore and possibly shoot/bomb/kill the people who wanted it. Have you guys ever heard of the phrase "self-determination"? The US government uses it all the time when it is lecturing the rest of the world on how to conduct their affairs.It seems to me you still have quite a lot to learn from your "mother Gentiles".As has already been stated, we aren't a democracy, we are a republic. The founding fathers were absolutely terrified of democracies (which they viewed as nothing more than 'mob rule' and a failed experiment, per it being ancient Greece's downfall) and worked hard to make sure the U.S. followed the Roman model of a republic. 2
TAO Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 http://en.wikipedia..../Texas_v._WhiteThis issue is settled law by the USSC, 600,000 dead, and our Pledge of Allegiance.Now this one is a good source. But keep in mind, this is the reason, it is not written in the Constitution directly.
thesometimesaint Posted December 21, 2012 Posted December 21, 2012 As it is the USSC job, Marbury v Madison, to interpret the Constitution. Such a direct quote is unnecessary.
Calm Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 It seems to me you still have quite a lot to learn from your "mother Gentiles".And just how long did it take for Ireland to get its independence? 1
Cobalt-70 Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 (edited) This has been interesting. I have discovered that the self appointed champions of democracy are nothing of the sort.So if one of the States held a referrendum on the question of leaving the union, and the vote was in favour of secession, that would count for nothing and the US government would ignore and possibly shoot/bomb/kill the people who wanted it. Have you guys ever heard of the phrase "self-determination"? The US government uses it all the time when it is lecturing the rest of the world on how to conduct their affairs.It seems to me you still have quite a lot to learn from your "mother Gentiles".The essence of democracy is that everybody gets a chance to vote, and everybody lives with the consequences of that vote. If you don't like the vote, you don't just sub-divide your democracy until you get your own way. The idea of "self-determination" is only relevant where you have a region of ethnically-distinct people who never really voluntarily agreed to be part of the union. But that's not the case in the United States. The voters who are looking for secession from the United States have no right to complaint that, sometimes, other people vote against them and they don't get their own precious way. Edited December 23, 2012 by Cobalt-70
Saints Alive Posted December 22, 2012 Author Posted December 22, 2012 I don't think anybody living today had a vote either
TAO Posted December 22, 2012 Posted December 22, 2012 As it is the USSC job, Marbury v Madison, to interpret the Constitution. Such a direct quote is unnecessary.No, such a direct quote is important. Courts can change precedent (and thus interpretation of the constitution). That's why courts are never as solid as the document itself.
Scott Lloyd Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 The essence of democracy is that everybody gets a chance to vote, and everybody lives with the consequences of that vote. If you don't like the vote, you don't just sub-divide your democracy until you get your own way. The idea of "self-determination" is only relevant where you have a region of ethnically-distinct people who never really voluntarily agreed to be part of the union. But that's not the case in the United States. The voters who are looking for succession from the United States have no right to complaint that, sometimes, other people vote against them and they don't get their own precious way.Finally, a post from Cobalt that I can agree with. But people, for the umpteenth time, it's secession, not succession.
blackstrap Posted December 23, 2012 Posted December 23, 2012 If there is a secession From the US there will be a succession To the US. I think.
Alan Posted December 24, 2012 Posted December 24, 2012 The essence of democracy is that everybody gets a chance to vote, and everybody lives with the consequences of that vote. If you don't like the vote, you don't just sub-divide your democracy until you get your own way. The idea of "self-determination" is only relevant where you have a region of ethnically-distinct people who never really voluntarily agreed to be part of the union. But that's not the case in the United States. The voters who are looking for secession from the United States have no right to complaint that, sometimes, other people vote against them and they don't get their own precious way.Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-American in the least. But sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and promoting democracy and self-determination all over the world but denying the same rights to your own people (because you call yourself a Republic) is duplicity of the highest order. It's no good saying the Constitution doesn't allow secession because you can amend it. The right to bare arms (which, by the way, has worked really well.......) is, I understand, an amendment, as is freedom of speech.As for self-determination only being "relavant where you have a region of ethnically distinct people" I think you have unwittingly proved my point. There are areas of the US where the black population is very dense or where the hispanics are or soon will be in the majority. And then, of course, there are the Native Americans who never "voluntarily agreed to be part of the union".
Nemesis Posted December 25, 2012 Posted December 25, 2012 Getting more political as we go. Thread closed.
Recommended Posts