Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
When and where is it stated that the Perpetual Union, that the Constitution was created in order to make 'more perfect', was no more?
Secessionists eagerly point out that the Constitution does not expressly forbid unilateral separation. They refuse to concede that the Perpetual Union has no mention of being repudiated.
No reputable substantiation for the opinion that Perpetual Union ended.
No reputable substantiation for the opinion that Perpetual Union ended.
I bet you don't even understand how that video unwittingly condemns Republicans. Just like you don't understand John Wilkes Booth was not a Democrat.
Yaah, we know, because Democrat of 1860 were really Republicans.
I'll be you don't understand how we know you're a fucking moron.
Spits the forum imbecile who thinks SC could unilatarally take away take back territory they ceded to the United States.
Of course they were southern Democrats then are southern Republicans now. You think you can magically change that?
There was no magical party switch you fucking idiot
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
This opinion has been stated previously. No factual evidence that it is true has been provided despite the number of times it has been presented. No such clear break was made. The Union continued, Perpetual. Thus, secession as it was attempted was and is illegal. The uprising was put down as any rebellion would be, naturally.When did it ever stop?
When we replaced the Articles of Confederation with the US Constitution. That was an easy one. Wow, 43 pages and finally you have your answer now. So States can secede, thanks!
Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
Glad you agree, idiot.Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
Um hmm, ok.
That's funny because those political hacks of Lincoln ' s are the ones that stopped him from suspending heabeus corpus.Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.[emoji38]Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
No reputable substantiation for the opinion that Perpetual Union ended.
Sure there is, the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the US Constitution. Also, the Articles of Confederation were only ratified by 13 States. You do need to prove that the Articles of Confederation are still in force as well as that they apply to the other 37 States who never ratified them. Or if you want to use Obama math, the 44 States who never ratified them
That's funny because those political hacks of Lincoln ' s are the ones that stopped him from suspending heabeus corpus.Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.[emoji38]Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
That's funny because those political hacks of Lincoln ' s are the ones that stopped him from suspending heabeus corpus.Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.[emoji38]Does any judge ever refer to the Articles of Confederation when rendering a decision?
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
No reputable substantiation for the opinion that Perpetual Union ended.
Sure there is, the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the US Constitution. Also, the Articles of Confederation were only ratified by 13 States. You do need to prove that the Articles of Confederation are still in force as well as that they apply to the other 37 States who never ratified them. Or if you want to use Obama math, the 44 States who never ratified them
The Constitution clearly grants the Federal government jurisdiction over territory in the States via the Supremecy Clause. And the States lack the authority to strip the Federal government of any constitutionally delegated power.
Even Madison recognized 'concurrent governments' over the territory of the States.
Since secession would rob the federal government of constitutionally delegated powers, secession is constitutionally invalid.
That's funny because those political hacks of Lincoln ' s are the ones that stopped him from suspending heabeus corpus.Yep. That's Salmon P. Chase paraphrasing his benefactor Lincoln. Chase was put on the court by Lincoln specifically for the purpose of justifying all the crimes he committed to prosecute the Civil War.[emoji38]
Yeah.
One of the ones you hate so much.
"The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation.
By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?" <--- SUPREME COURT
Cue birdpat spitting: Doesn't Count! "Lincoln's handpicked cronies."
And the little snot-nosed, middle-finger wagging toddler will pretend *he* is the last word.
lolol
One might as well ask Joseph Goebbels what he thought of the invasion of Poland.
Discounting a duly appointed justice of the supreme court doesn't make your case. It makes you crazy.
Supreme Court justices are all hand picked political hacks. They are easily "discounted." One hand picked by Lincoln to defined his war crimes is even more easily "discounted."
You belief that Supreme Court justices are infallible makes you an idiot.
Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk
Its an irrelevant argument. As saint and his ilk will ignore any USSC ruling, from any justice, under any circumstances, appointed by any president....if the ruling doesn't ape what they believe.
Making the circumstances of any particular ruling meaningless to their argument. And always meaningless constitutionally, as a constitutionally nominated and confirmed Supreme Court is granted the authority to adjudicate any issue that arises under the constitution. The validity of that ruling constitutionally has nothing to do with whether or not saint and such agree.
Their agreement or disagreement is gloriously irrelevant to the authority of the ruling.
No reputable substantiation for the opinion that Perpetual Union ended.
Sure there is, the Articles of Confederation were replaced by the US Constitution. Also, the Articles of Confederation were only ratified by 13 States. You do need to prove that the Articles of Confederation are still in force as well as that they apply to the other 37 States who never ratified them. Or if you want to use Obama math, the 44 States who never ratified them
The Constitution clearly grants the Federal government jurisdiction over territory in the States via the Supremecy Clause. And the States lack the authority to strip the Federal government of any constitutionally delegated power.
Even Madison recognized 'concurrent governments' over the territory of the States.
Since secession would rob the federal government of constitutionally delegated powers, secession is constitutionally invalid.
Repeating your swill 10,000 times won't make it true.
