Civil War in the USA?

[lobato1]

My reference: http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...cede-no-matter-how-many-petitioners-sign.html




Best Regards

Lobato1

The right to leave is listed in the state's constitution and it was accepted by the feds......

It looks to me like they have that right.

It's not a big deal though because the constitution does not grant the federal government the power to prevent such an act and the tenth amendment gives all powers not specifically granted to the feds by the constitution to the states unless it is specifically denied to the states by the constitution and then it remains a power of the people.

The civil war was unconstitutional for two primary reasons:
1. The federal government did not have the power to force states to remain in the union.
2. War was declared without the proper majority of congressional approval.

The supreme court ruling is also bogus because the constitution doesn't give the court that power.

The whole issue is a moot point because we are living in a oligarchy instead of the republic which was founded. We no longer have any rights - they have become privileges that are granted at the grace of the federal government.

Welcome to the United Socialist America!

 

[FA_Q2]

My reference: http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...cede-no-matter-how-many-petitioners-sign.html




Best Regards

Lobato1

The right to leave is listed in the state's constitution and it was accepted by the feds......

It looks to me like they have that right.

It's not a big deal though because the constitution does not grant the federal government the power to prevent such an act and the tenth amendment gives all powers not specifically granted to the feds by the constitution to the states unless it is specifically denied to the states by the constitution and then it remains a power of the people.

The civil war was unconstitutional for two primary reasons:
1. The federal government did not have the power to force states to remain in the union.
2. War was declared without the proper majority of congressional approval.

The supreme court ruling is also bogus because the constitution doesn't give the court that power.

The whole issue is a moot point because we are living in a oligarchy instead of the republic which was founded. We no longer have any rights - they have become privileges that are granted at the grace of the federal government.

Welcome to the United Socialist America!

You honestly cite yourself as a source where you cited a Google search? That is not a source by any definition. Here is one though that uses quotes from several founders:
Do States Have a Right of Secession? - Capitalism Magazine

Thomas Jefferson in his First Inaugural Address said, “If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union, or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it.” Fifteen years later, after the New England Federalists attempted to secede, Jefferson said, “If any state in the Union will declare that it prefers separation … to a continuance in the union …. I have no hesitation in saying, ‘Let us separate.’”

At Virginia’s ratification convention, the delegates said, “The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” In Federalist Paper 39, James Madison, the father of the Constitution, cleared up what “the people” meant, saying the proposed Constitution would be subject to ratification by the people, “not as individuals composing one entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong.” In a word, states were sovereign; the federal government was a creation, an agent, a servant of the states.

So, originally, and if you bother to read and understand the constitution in its original form, succession was indeed a viable option. That was changed with the civil war though as we all know that the victors of a war usually write in a few new rules to the defeated.

The question today is rather moot because even though the right existed at the founding it clearly is no longer the case. Any state wishing succession WILL be at war with the nation, that is a simple fact.

 

[lobato1]

statements, when it was Jefferson (& George Washington) that were the motivators of converting the original Confederation into a Federation.

Does that tell you anything about your out of context BS?

No?
​

I didn't think so.
​

As for you not LUVing my original reference, okay I'll play your game for this one time & one time only by clicking on the 1st 10 references of my google search that I was careful to use the appropriate filters, but hey...

Enjoy:

No American state has the right to secede no matter how many petitioners sign.
​

Let’s remember that the original Thirteen Colonies confederated themselves with a constitution that was known as: “Articles of Confederation & Perpetual Union,” this was an agreement among these 13 founding states that established the United States of America as a confederation of sovereign states & served as it's first constitution of 1781.

However, it was the South fearing being abandoned by the North & headed by the Virginians George Washington & Thomas Jefferson that insisted on a federation & carried the day of an “Indissoluble Federation of States.” in 1788.

My References on the “Perpetual Union,” :

Articles of Confederation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Confederation, Articles of: The Articles | Infoplease.com

The Articles of Confederation - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Articles of Confederation | Early America's Milestone Historic Documents

Articles of Confederation | Nolo.com

United States Articles of Confederation

Perpetual Union Free Essays 1 - 20

Avalon Project - Articles of Confederation : March 1, 1781

Articles of Confederation? - Yahoo! Answers

What is the Articles of Confederation? - Yahoo! Answers

​

​

Consequently all “Territories Purchased” by these original Thirteen Colonies & their emigrants (&/or natives) that were given the privilege of emigrating into those territories that then became federated states have no right to secede. Including Texas that knew when she applied for admission into a “Indissoluble Federation of States.”

Best Regards

Lobato1

My reference: http://www.usmessageboard.com/clean...cede-no-matter-how-many-petitioners-sign.html




Best Regards

Lobato1

The right to leave is listed in the state's constitution and it was accepted by the feds......

It looks to me like they have that right.

It's not a big deal though because the constitution does not grant the federal government the power to prevent such an act and the tenth amendment gives all powers not specifically granted to the feds by the constitution to the states unless it is specifically denied to the states by the constitution and then it remains a power of the people.

The civil war was unconstitutional for two primary reasons:
1. The federal government did not have the power to force states to remain in the union.
2. War was declared without the proper majority of congressional approval.

The supreme court ruling is also bogus because the constitution doesn't give the court that power.

The whole issue is a moot point because we are living in a oligarchy instead of the republic which was founded. We no longer have any rights - they have become privileges that are granted at the grace of the federal government.

Welcome to the United Socialist America!

You honestly cite yourself as a source where you cited a Google search? That is not a source by any definition. Here is one though that uses quotes from several founders:
Do States Have a Right of Secession? - Capitalism Magazine

Thomas Jefferson in his First Inaugural Address said, “If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union, or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left to combat it.” Fifteen years later, after the New England Federalists attempted to secede, Jefferson said, “If any state in the Union will declare that it prefers separation … to a continuance in the union …. I have no hesitation in saying, ‘Let us separate.’”

At Virginia’s ratification convention, the delegates said, “The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” In Federalist Paper 39, James Madison, the father of the Constitution, cleared up what “the people” meant, saying the proposed Constitution would be subject to ratification by the people, “not as individuals composing one entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong.” In a word, states were sovereign; the federal government was a creation, an agent, a servant of the states.

So, originally, and if you bother to read and understand the constitution in its original form, succession was indeed a viable option. That was changed with the civil war though as we all know that the victors of a war usually write in a few new rules to the defeated.

The question today is rather moot because even though the right existed at the founding it clearly is no longer the case. Any state wishing succession WILL be at war with the nation, that is a simple fact.

 

[PaulS1950]

Even extending to the Articles of Confederation - the sovereignty of the states is announced:

Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

The States were so against a federal government that would control them that when the Articles of Confederation proved inadequate to maintain freedom from outside invasion they adopted the constitution that grants only certain powers to the federal government and leaves the states their sovereignty. - see the tenth amendment.

 

[Katzndogz]

Civil war and state secession is the least of the problems, those could be dealt with. There is also just plain war, and Americans looking around at the crumbling PC ridden hellhole Godless atheists have constructed and seeing an external army not nearly as bad as what they have now.

 

[lobato1]

“Articles of Confederation & Perpetual Union,”
​

​

​

​

Nice try though, try again.

Best Regards

Lobato1

Even extending to the Articles of Confederation - the sovereignty of the states is announced:

Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

The States were so against a federal government that would control them that when the Articles of Confederation proved inadequate to maintain freedom from outside invasion they adopted the constitution that grants only certain powers to the federal government and leaves the states their sovereignty. - see the tenth amendment.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

& in my Secessionist Texas Governor Rick Perry’s words not mine:

When we came into the nation in 1845, we were a republic, we were a stand-alone nation, & one of the deals was, we can leave anytime we want.

“So we’re kind of thinking about that again” ​

My Reference: Rick Perry Wants Texas to Secede from the United States | Rowdy Pulpit


& since you didn’t like my previous Business Insider’s reference feel free to use any of these other references: 2009 "Rick Perry" secession "So we?re kind of thinking about that again" -obama - Yahoo! Search Results


​

Best Regards

Lobato1

Thanks again for the left wing talking points. I certainly appreciated the quotes from Perry that were featured in the Business Insider. Oh wait! There weren't any!

PolitiFact | Rick Perry and secession

Well, I looked up the main reference you gave me Rick Perry Wants Texas to Secede from the United States | Rowdy Pulpit and I suspect you may not have read it. It stated what I've been stating. Nobody but you seems to think he was seriously suggesting that Texas should secede. The article that you sited said it was light hearted banter. Let me quote part of the article. "Clearly, the Texas Governor was joking, and the bloggers meeting with him that day felt so too. It was worth a chuckle".
Should anybody else want to read the article, please do, it goes into further detail on how the left wing media distorted Perry's quotes.
Thank you Lobato for your help.

 

[PaulS1950]

“Articles of Confederation & Perpetual Union,”
​

​

​

​

Nice try though, try again.

Best Regards

Lobato1

Even extending to the Articles of Confederation - the sovereignty of the states is announced:

Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

The States were so against a federal government that would control them that when the Articles of Confederation proved inadequate to maintain freedom from outside invasion they adopted the constitution that grants only certain powers to the federal government and leaves the states their sovereignty. - see the tenth amendment.

You forgot the rest of that line:
"Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia."

I don't see that any other states have formed a "perpetual union" other than those listed. Remember that this document was superseded by the constitution. It has no legal standing other than as a reference document. As a reference it is important to note that even having stated a perpetual union between those states it goes on to say the following:


"Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever."

Which further defines their relationship as a voluntary partnership and not as a "nation" unto itself.

 

[lobato1]

But I should have added that all “Territories Purchased” by these original Thirteen Colonies & their emigrants (&/or natives) that were given the privilege of emigrating into those territories that then became federated states have no right to secede Including my state of Texas that knew she was asking to join an “Indissoluble Federation of States.” from day one in 1835 to 1845 when Texas was "Admitted".

That was the bases of the new Federal Constitution of an “Indissoluble Federation of States.” in 1788.

My References on the “Perpetual Union,” :

Articles of Confederation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Confederation, Articles of: The Articles | Infoplease.com

The Articles of Confederation - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Articles of Confederation | Early America's Milestone Historic Documents

Articles of Confederation | Nolo.com

United States Articles of Confederation

Perpetual Union Free Essays 1 - 20

Avalon Project - Articles of Confederation : March 1, 1781

Articles of Confederation? - Yahoo! Answers

What is the Articles of Confederation? - Yahoo! Answers

​

​

Best Regards

Lobato1

“Articles of Confederation & Perpetual Union,”
​

​

​

​

Nice try though, try again.

Best Regards

Lobato1

Even extending to the Articles of Confederation - the sovereignty of the states is announced:

Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.

The States were so against a federal government that would control them that when the Articles of Confederation proved inadequate to maintain freedom from outside invasion they adopted the constitution that grants only certain powers to the federal government and leaves the states their sovereignty. - see the tenth amendment.

You forgot the rest of that line:
"Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia."

I don't see that any other states have formed a "perpetual union" other than those listed. Remember that this document was superseded by the constitution. It has no legal standing other than as a reference document. As a reference it is important to note that even having stated a perpetual union between those states it goes on to say the following:


"Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts-bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever."

Which further defines their relationship as a voluntary partnership and not as a "nation" unto itself.