Before 1860 secession was considered to be constitutional

[NYcarbineer]

Bullshit. Slavery was on its way out. Every country on the face of mother earth abolished slavery without wiping out 620,000 citizens.



More bullshit.

South Carolina asked politely and respectfully for Lincoln to remove federal troops from Fort Sumter. The scumbag refused.

The war of northern aggression wasn't about slavery it was about excise taxes and real state.

Apologists came up with the slavery subterfuge because they needed a pretext after causing 620,000 Americans to die.

.

I guess you can explain to us why the seceding states specifically mentioned slavery in their secession proclamations?

Just as soon as you explain:

1- The reason Lincoln admitted to the New York Tribune Newspaper that abolishing slavery was NOT the purpose of the Northern aggression

2- The reason he chose Johnson as his Vice president when he was a slave owner in Tennessee;

.

I don't have to. Every state that cited slavery as a reason for secession proves you wrong.

 

[thanatos144]

Bullshit. Slavery was on its way out. Every country on the face of mother earth abolished slavery without wiping out 620,000 citizens.



More bullshit.

South Carolina asked politely and respectfully for Lincoln to remove federal troops from Fort Sumter. The scumbag refused.

The war of northern aggression wasn't about slavery it was about excise taxes and real state.

Apologists came up with the slavery subterfuge because they needed a pretext after causing 620,000 Americans to die.

.

I guess you can explain to us why the seceding states specifically mentioned slavery in their secession proclamations?

Just as soon as you explain:

1- The reason Lincoln admitted to the New York Tribune Newspaper that abolishing slavery was NOT the purpose of the Northern aggression

2- The reason he chose Johnson as his Vice president when he was a slave owner in Tennessee;

.

because to Lincoln it was about holding the Union together slavery was a bonus. and before you try to blow smoke up my ass Abraham Lincoln did not agree with slavery

 

[NYcarbineer]

Horseshit. That's a claim lacking any visible means of support. There is no language in the Constitution stating anyone has a fundamental right to be a citizen of the federal government. In those days people considered themselves to be citizens of their respective states. No one ever said "I am an American." They said "I'm a Virginian" or "I'm from North Carolina."

You have no facts or logic on your side. You simply repeat the same pathetic arguments over and over.

Let's remind everyone that you are the guy in this thread who believes that he can secede from his township and in the process legally exempt himself from having to obey local laws, regulations, ordinances,

and exempt himself from paying town taxes, effectively turn his property into a sovereign nation,

and all of that is perfectly legal and constitutiionally protected.

...speaking of pathetic arguments...

I have never said it was legal or Constitutionally protected. However, it certainly isn't prohibited by the Constitution.

Okay, so now you're admitting that just because something isn't prohibited, explicitly, word for word, in the Constitution, doesn't automatically make it constitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Okay, so let's say a state considers seceding, and by a referendum vote of 70 to 30%,

they vote for secession.

What about the 30% who voted against it? Can the State force them to leave the Union against their will?

 

[Ernie S.]

I think that Texas has every right to secede from the United States and should do so posthaste.

texas might start a trend

I think they should.

What are you going to eat? What would you do for fuel? Shit! If the Conservative states succeeded, the north would all be going commando in a year.

 

[Ernie S.]

Okay, so let's say a state considers seceding, and by a referendum vote of 70 to 30%,

they vote for secession.

What about the 30% who voted against it? Can the State force them to leave the Union against their will?

What if a state proposes a tax on, let's say soda and a referendum passes 70% to 30%. Do the people who voted against the tax not have to pay it?

I suppose they COULD move somewhere that didn't tax soda...

 

[Crackerjaxon]

Actually, the laws were set up to protect the rights of sovereign citizens. That's what all men are created equal is about, the rejection of the idea of royalty and tyrannical governments.

Everyone who is forced to pay income tax on earned income is suffering involuntary servitude. There is no other sane way to look at it.

Taxation is theft.

What would your government look like if there was no power to tax? Be specific.

What would our government look like if taxes were minimal, the government accountable and its services limited to those enumerated by the constitution?

I think that's the question. Government is a necessary evil, not a panacea.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There was nothing and there is nothing in the United States Constitution that forbids the right to secede from the Union. The Declaration of Independence asserts the right to secede.

Abraham Lincoln was a genius. When the Southern states seceded many in the North were willing to let them go. Many in the North who hated Southern whites were willing to let them go. Lincoln manuvered the Confederacy to bomb Fort Sumter. That angered Northerners enough to make them willing to fight the South.

Lincoln could have gone down in history as America's worst president: a man so hated that his election divided the country. Instead he is considered to be one of America's two or three greatest presidents.

Until the Civil War became a war against slavery the South had the better side of the argument. After the Emancipation Proclamation the North did.

In order to JOIN the Union requires an act of Congress, Care to point out where that is in the Constitution? One can safely assume that since joining requires Congress leaving does also and LEGALLY that is a fact due to a Supreme Court decision.

That Supreme Court decision was a complete and utter fraud.

Joining a club requires the permission of the members. Does that mean leaving the club requires their permission?

Your legal theories are obvious horseshit.

I joined Golds Gym, in order to leave I must submit a written request and then wait for them to approve it.

Once again show me where in the Constitution it states in order to Join the Union one must get approval from Congress.

 

[thanatos144]

In order to JOIN the Union requires an act of Congress, Care to point out where that is in the Constitution? One can safely assume that since joining requires Congress leaving does also and LEGALLY that is a fact due to a Supreme Court decision.

That Supreme Court decision was a complete and utter fraud.

Joining a club requires the permission of the members. Does that mean leaving the club requires their permission?

Your legal theories are obvious horseshit.

I joined Golds Gym, in order to leave I must submit a written request and then wait for them to approve it.

Once again show me where in the Constitution it states in order to Join the Union one must get approval from Congress.

I guess we should look at how Alaska and Hawaii join the union.

 

[Contumacious]

I guess you can explain to us why the seceding states specifically mentioned slavery in their secession proclamations?

Just as soon as you explain:

1- The reason Lincoln admitted to the New York Tribune Newspaper that abolishing slavery was NOT the purpose of the Northern aggression

2- The reason he chose Johnson as his Vice president when he was a slave owner in Tennessee;

.

because to Lincoln it was about holding the Union together slavery was a bonus. and before you try to blow smoke up my ass Abraham Lincoln did not agree with slavery

Lincoln's direct statements indicated his support for slavery; He
defended slave owners' right to own their property, saying that
"when they remind us of their constitutional rights [to own
slaves], I acknowledge them, not grudgingly but fully and fairly;
and I would give them any legislation for the claiming of their
fugitives" (in indicating support for the Fugitive Slave Act
of 1850).

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lincoln considered slavery constitutional: no doubt about that.

Lincoln considered slavery a deadly parasite killing the country by the summer of 1862: no doubt about that.

Lincoln began the death of slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation and the Radical Republicans happily began the process of the 13th Amendment.

Slavery was wrong, Lincoln was right, and everyone since his death who has argued that he was is absolutely wrong: no doubt about that.

 

[Contumacious]

I guess you can explain to us why the seceding states specifically mentioned slavery in their secession proclamations?

Just as soon as you explain:

1- The reason Lincoln admitted to the New York Tribune Newspaper that abolishing slavery was NOT the purpose of the Northern aggression

2- The reason he chose Johnson as his Vice president when he was a slave owner in Tennessee;

.

I don't have to. Every state that cited slavery as a reason for secession proves you wrong.

Excuse me Dingleberry, but at the time the Constitution was signed it was understood that some states allowed slavery.

It would like you beating your wife after 20 years of marriage because that mole on her nose suddenly bothers you.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Just as soon as you explain:

1- The reason Lincoln admitted to the New York Tribune Newspaper that abolishing slavery was NOT the purpose of the Northern aggression

2- The reason he chose Johnson as his Vice president when he was a slave owner in Tennessee;

.

I don't have to. Every state that cited slavery as a reason for secession proves you wrong.

Excuse me Dingleberry, but at the time the Constitution was signed it was understood that some states allowed slavery.

It would like you beating your wife after 20 years of marriage because that mole on her nose suddenly bothers you.

.

Your derivative analogy offers nothing here and quickly as your demonstrates falls apart.

 

[Contumacious]

Lincoln began the death of slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation and the Radical Republicans happily began the process of the 13th Amendment.
.

Comrade Starkiev, you are as per usual, confused. It must be that Vodka.

Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was little more than a political
gimmick, and he admitted so in a letter to Treasury Secretary Salmon
P. Chase: "The original proclamation has no…legal justification,
except as a military measure." Secretary of State William Seward
said, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves
where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we
can set them free. " Seward was acknowledging the fact that
the Emancipation Proclamation applied only to slaves in states in
rebellion against the United States and not to slaves in states
not in rebellion. "

.

 

[thanatos144]

Horseshit. That's a claim lacking any visible means of support. There is no language in the Constitution stating anyone has a fundamental right to be a citizen of the federal government. In those days people considered themselves to be citizens of their respective states. No one ever said "I am an American." They said "I'm a Virginian" or "I'm from North Carolina."

You have no facts or logic on your side. You simply repeat the same pathetic arguments over and over.

Let's remind everyone that you are the guy in this thread who believes that he can secede from his township and in the process legally exempt himself from having to obey local laws, regulations, ordinances,

and exempt himself from paying town taxes, effectively turn his property into a sovereign nation,

and all of that is perfectly legal and constitutiionally protected.

...speaking of pathetic arguments...

I have never said it was legal or Constitutionally protected. However, it certainly isn't prohibited by the Constitution.

neither beastieality or murder.

 

[Toro]

I've always found it ironic that libertarians who purport that the Federal government (a collective) was acting in tyranny by not allowing the Southern states (also collectives) to leave fall back on the claim that states (remember, collectives) had the right to leave the union so they (the collective) could legally deny the rights of individuals (the slaves) they claim are inherent from God.

These so-called "libertarians" are merely defending one collective over another.

Their defense of liberty might have some credibility if these Southern "patriots" hadn't used legal force of the state (reminder --> the collective) to subjugate individual rights for 100 years after the Civil War through the morally repugnant Segregation.

 

[thanatos144]

I've always found it ironic that libertarians who purport that the Federal government (a collective) was acting in tyranny by not allowing the Southern states (also collectives) to leave fall back on the claim that states (remember, collectives) had the right to leave the union so they (the collective) could legally deny the rights of individuals (the slaves) they claim are inherent from God.

These so-called "libertarians" are merely defending one collective over another.

Their defense of liberty might have some credibility if these Southern "patriots" hadn't used legal force of the state (reminder --> the collective) to subjugate individual rights for 100 years after the Civil War through the morally repugnant Segregation.

I know those damn Democrat surely did run rampant with them people didn't they

 

[Vandalshandle]

The Constitution is silent on the issue, but the Federalist Papers, mostly written by Madison, "The Father of the Constitutuion" state very clearly that the whole purpose of the Constitutution is "UNION". At the time these papers were written there was a political movement for three seperate unions, New England, Mid Atlantic, and South. The framers were definately opposed to that.

South Carolina had been trying to suceed from the union since the early 1800's. Their biggest effort (other than the civil war) was during Jackson's presidency, whereby they passed a resolution which would have nullified certain federal tarriffs, (which was the only revenue source that the Feds had in those days). Jackson, not being a timid man, sent word that he had no problem occupying the state with federal troops if necessary. South Carolina backed off. Jackson's VP, Calhoun, resigned, and got elected as a senator so that he could lead this battle for SC.

At the end of his life, someone asked Jackson if he had any regrets over his presidency. he replied. "I regret that I did not hang Calhoun".

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lincoln began the death of slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation and the Radical Republicans happily began the process of the 13th Amendment.
.

Comrade Starkiev, you are as per usual, confused..

Silly comment by a silly libertarian. Since some above have revealed how abysmally ignorant they are about the history of slavery in North America, they can begin here.

I encourage all to no longer to reply to their silly statements until (1) they get serious about the subject and (2) their posts indicate at least a basic understanding.

Slavery in America Video ? History.com

 

[Ernie S.]

I don't have to. Every state that cited slavery as a reason for secession proves you wrong.

Excuse me Dingleberry, but at the time the Constitution was signed it was understood that some states allowed slavery.

It would like you beating your wife after 20 years of marriage because that mole on her nose suddenly bothers you.

.

Your derivative analogy offers nothing here and quickly as your demonstrates falls apart.

Drunk so early?