• Welcome, Guest. Please login.
October 27, 2021, 12:02:51 AM

Was The Union Perpetual?

Started by Shooterman, February 11, 2012, 03:58:55 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sci Fi Fan

Quote from: Solar on July 02, 2012, 07:48:38 AM
Read my above post.
Your need to make the Federal Govt the King with the final say, slaps in the face of what the Founders had in mind,

I don't think you understand what we're discussing here.  The federal government is king over the states.  Not only is your whiny appeal to the founders irrelevant, it's clearly wrong, given that this principle is explicitly stated in the Constitution.

Quote
they saw the Govt as the servant of the people, not the other way around.

Why do you equate people with the states?

QuoteRemember, we retain the right to dismantle as a people, a corrupt Govt.

The right?  Perhaps, but not legal rights.  No sane government would ever write into law the right to rebel against the state...in fact, it is quite explicitly outlawed in the Constitution.  Huh.

Quote
That hardly sounds like a Govt with the right to dictate to Sovereign States whether they can stay or not.

Sovereign people, or sovereign states?  There's a difference here.


You still haven't answered my question regarding the practical implications of any state having the right to secede from the union on a whim.

---------------------------------------------

And to get it out of the way, do you hold any sympathy over the confederacy's specific secession?

Solar

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 03, 2012, 05:12:42 AM
I don't think you understand what we're discussing here.  The federal government is king over the states.  Not only is your whiny appeal to the founders irrelevant, it's clearly wrong, given that this principle is explicitly stated in the Constitution.

No it's NOT, read the Bill of Rights!
And what part of Sovereign State, do you not understand?

QuoteWhy do you equate people with the states?
HUH?
QuoteThe right?  Perhaps, but not legal rights.  No sane government would ever write into law the right to rebel against the state...in fact, it is quite explicitly outlawed in the Constitution.  Huh.

Sovereign people, or sovereign states?  There's a difference here.

Jefferson termed the "unalienable Rights" of Americans, chief among which, he wrote, are "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The Declaration described in simple terms what governments are meant to do, and what citizens are obliged to do if governments fail to perform to specification. "That to secure these [unalienable] rights," Jefferson explained,

    Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and Happiness.
Quote
You still haven't answered my question regarding the practical implications of any state having the right to secede from the union on a whim.
Whim, do you think any State would take secession lightly?

QuoteAnd to get it out of the way, do you hold any sympathy over the confederacy's specific secession?
That question makes no sense.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Sci Fi Fan

Quote from: Solar on July 03, 2012, 05:32:26 AM
No it's NOT, read the Bill of Rights!

Federal law is supreme over state law.  This is rather explicit and final; no need to twist the 9th amendment and rewrite it to suit your own agenda.

Quote
And what part of Sovereign State, do you not understand?

Show me where in the Constitution states are declared sovereign.

Quote
HUH?
Jefferson termed the "unalienable Rights" of Americans, chief among which, he wrote, are "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The Declaration described in simple terms what governments are meant to do, and what citizens are obliged to do if governments fail to perform to specification. "That to secure these [unalienable] rights," Jefferson explained,

I don't think you understand Jefferson's words.

Jefferson never argued that the law should allow for rebellion (that would be stupid); he himself had his vice president tried for treason.  He merely argued that the people are in the ethical right to abolish an unjust government.

Is what is stated in the Declaration in any manner related to what is constitutional and what isn't?  No, not at all.  Stop using ethics to argue legality. 

-----------------------------------------------------------

Now; if you wish to shift the subject and discuss the ethics of secession, I'd be happy to oblige.

Quote
    Governments are instituted among Men states, deriving their just powers to tax and enslave from the consent of the governed white male state legislatures, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends slavery, it is the Right legal right of the people white male state legislatures to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government laying its foundation on such principles the white christian male power structure and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and Happiness yet, upon finding their pro states' rights government entirely unequipped to battle their motherland, institute a strong central authority.

Fixed.

Quote
Whim, do you think any State would take secession lightly?

Whim was an exaggeration.  You still haven't answered the question: if we established the precedent that any state can secede whenever it wants to, how could either the United States or the Confederacy have survived longer than two decades?

QuoteThat question makes no sense.

Are you a Confederate sympathizer? 

Shooterman

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 03, 2012, 05:44:51 AM
Show me where in the Constitution states are declared sovereign.

Show where the states are not declared sovereign.

What is the Constitution but a Compact among the States that created the union? Each state was sovereign and gave some of that sovereignty- limited- to the union they had created. The created can never be greater than the creator.

I don't think you understand Jefferson's words.

QuoteJefferson never argued that the law should allow for rebellion (that would be stupid); he himself had his vice president tried for treason.  He merely argued that the people are in the ethical right to abolish an unjust government.

Then are they not morally right and duty bound to overthrow a tyrannical government?

I would suggest a perusal by you of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and the principle of state nullification, which is worthless without the ultimate step of secession.

................................

QuoteAre you a Confederate sympathizer?

Can not speak for Solar or anyone else, but I damned sure am.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

walkstall


Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 03, 2012, 05:44:51 AM


Are you a Confederate sympathizer?






Quote from: Shooterman on July 03, 2012, 07:55:17 AM


................................

Can not speak for Solar or anyone else, but I damned sure am.


:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  Shooterman has been as long as I have know him.    :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:  Sick em Shooter!!!!!
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

mdgiles

QuoteWhat is the Constitution but a Compact among the States that created the union? Each state was sovereign and gave some of that sovereignty- limited- to the union they had created. The created can never be greater than the creator.
Just a point, but the union was greater than any individual state. They recognized that principle, which is why they formed a union in the first place. And give up part of their sovereignty? They gave up the three greatest powers of a sovereign state. Their militias became subject to federal control. They could no longer deal with foreign states. And the only money that was accepted everywhere was US currency.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

Shooterman

Quote from: mdgiles on July 03, 2012, 09:30:32 AM
Just a point, but the union was greater than any individual state. They recognized that principle, which is why they formed a union in the first place.

Nope, everything but the amount of sovereignty they gave to the union, was reserved unto themselves- not collectively, but completely. They only formed the union to make some things a tad easier- defense mainly. Even then they preferred limitations- no standing armies, no entangling alliances with other nations. Anything and everything not specifically allocated to the union was reserved to themselves and/or the people. ( of the states, BTW ) Almost of a certainty, everyone knew that the right to give sovereignty could be rescinded.

The union did not just appear in a vacuum, MD, but was created by the states ( people of the states meeting in convention ) by the ratification process. I'll go one step farther. At one time, certainly not very long, but still for a period, there were two unions in force Those beyond the original nine ratifying the new Constitution, and the four left before the ratification. If the four had never ratified, would they have been forced, by arms, to do so? I have asked that of others and never received an honest answer.

I ask again. Who formed the union? When was it formed? What were the rules of the new union? Who, in effect, wrote them?
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Shooterman

BTW, the currency of the new union was not the only currency accepted. The currency could not be counterfeited, but an equivalent of a unit of gold or silver, could be minted by individual banks. It happened. An ounce of gold or a silver piece of eight was recognized currency until our beloved criminals in DC decided to make paper the currency of the realm by Fiat.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

Shooterman

Quote from: walkstall on July 03, 2012, 08:58:34 AM






:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  Shooterman has been as long as I have know him.    :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:  :thumbsup:  Sick em Shooter!!!!!

I will make no apology for my state or for my kin that fought to preserve their homes.
There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

walkstall

Quote from: Shooterman on July 03, 2012, 10:08:09 AM
I will make no apology for my state or for my kin that fought to preserve their homes.

I would hope not your man.  I have learned a lot from you Southerners for the South, that was not even in the old text book.   :thumbup:
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Solar

Quote from: Shooterman on July 03, 2012, 07:55:17 AM
Show where the states are not declared sovereign.

What is the Constitution but a Compact among the States that created the union? Each state was sovereign and gave some of that sovereignty- limited- to the union they had created. The created can never be greater than the creator.

I don't think you understand Jefferson's words.


Then are they not morally right and duty bound to overthrow a tyrannical government?

I would suggest a perusal by you of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and the principle of state nullification, which is worthless without the ultimate step of secession.

................................

Can not speak for Solar or anyone else, but I damned sure am.
You pretty much did. :thumbsup:

I highly doubt any of us can get through this kids head, that Govt. is not our friend, but instead has become an opponent, one that needs to be caged and put back in restraints.
Although this time, in shackles and throw away the freakin key!!!.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

mdgiles

QuoteI would suggest a perusal by you of the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions of 1798 and 1799, and the principle of state nullification, which is worthless without the ultimate step of secession.
And I suggest you read up on the Nullification Crisis of 1832. What is it about neo confederates constantly trying to convince us they fought for some cause nobler than human chattel slavery. States Rights? The minute the South supported the Fugitive Slave Act, they forfeited any claim to being the "champions" of states rights. Or state sovereignty.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

Shooterman

Quote from: mdgiles on July 04, 2012, 01:17:11 AM
And I suggest you read up on the Nullification Crisis of 1832. What is it about neo confederates constantly trying to convince us they fought for some cause nobler than human chattel slavery. States Rights? The minute the South supported the Fugitive Slave Act, they forfeited any claim to being the "champions" of states rights. Or state sovereignty.

How so? Rightly or wrongly, and it was wrong morally to own another person, but until the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, which freed the slaves, and rightly so, they were still considered property, not only by the slave owners themselves, but by many Yankees, as well. Supporting a return of an investment was, under the law, not unreasonable. As you would expect property stolen from you to be returned.

I certainly do not know what ever the hell a neo- Confederate is, MD. I am sure it is intended as a pejorative, which is not really surprising.   :thumbdown:

As you well know, many Yankees held slaves as their property as did freed Blacks.

There's no ticks like Polyticks-bloodsuckers all Davy Crockett 1786-1836

Yankees are like castor oil. Even a small dose is bad.
[IMG]

mdgiles

Quote from: Shooterman on July 04, 2012, 01:53:21 AM
How so? Rightly or wrongly, and it was wrong morally to own another person, but until the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, which freed the slaves, and rightly so, they were still considered property, not only by the slave owners themselves, but by many Yankees, as well. Supporting a return of an investment was, under the law, not unreasonable. As you would expect property stolen from you to be returned.

I certainly do not know what ever the hell a neo- Confederate is, MD. I am sure it is intended as a pejorative, which is not really surprising.   :thumbdown:

As you well know, many Yankees held slaves as their property as did freed Blacks.
The Fugitive Slave Act used the power of the federal government to enforce slave law of slave states in free states. Neo Confederate is simply a term for those who attempt to justify the Civil War on the basis either of outmoded ideas about the Constitution, or on the basis of our current problems with an overweening federal government. In a way it also refers to historical revisionists, like those who despite the slavery clause in succession documents and in the Confederate Constitution claim the Civil War wasn't about slavery. As for free blacks who owned slaves, yes there was the occasion free black plantation owner , especially in Louisiana - which due to it's French background - was  case all to itself. However, often due to the difficulty in freeing slaves in the South, slaves were often family members. It was simpler to buy your wife and children and hold them as your property, than it was to go through the long drawn out process of freeing them. Besides all you had to do was make sure they were freed in your will, which was a much easier process.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

mdgiles

Quote from: Solar on July 04, 2012, 03:21:55 AM
I'm curious, were all slaves black?
Originally no, because slaves weren't always slaves, they were indentures and were freed after seven years. Lifetime chattel slavery was brought to the United States, by British plantation owners who moved from Barbados to South Carolina. Do you know that the Constitution says nothing about slaves, only persons held in servitude. Lincoln in a speech given in Chicago, on July 10, 1858 reminded his audience of that, along with the fact that if the Declaration of Independence's famous clause "that all men were created equal" could be amended to read "except Negros", than it could also be amended to exclude others.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!