Modern conservatives sympathizing with The Confederacy... Is this a thing now?

[paperview]

The Constitution gave that power to Congress- and Congress passed the Militia Acts of 1792 and 1795- which did allow the President to call out the militias as Lincoln did

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

 

[jillian]

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist asshole.

I love how anyone that disagrees with you on anything at all is automatically declared a lover of Hitler and/or Stalin


You're one of my favorite members here, simply because you are so ludicrous.

that's because he's kind of a moron.

 

[jillian]

Earlier, one of our really despicable racists went so far as to say Booth was a hero for assassinating Lincoln. Odious or whatever his name is. He's an ignorant jackass.

Some of these dummies still hold on to confederate money rather than invest in the US or their own future.

All in all, not a very smart lot.

So if someone thinks States have the right to secede from the union, that means they think the reasons any State ever wanted to secede from the union were just.

Hmm

And you talk about other people not being "smart?"

Hmm

Carry on, simpleton

you calling anyone else a simpleton is kind of amusing.

 

[bripat9643]

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

The Confederate Constitution forbade the importation of African slaves- except it explicitly allowed for the importation of slaves from other slave states.
...

The South had no problem with banning the overseas slave trade. They were breeding them here. More money to be made.

Didn't want outside competition.

That's because the slave trade was head quartered in New England.

Bullshit.

South Carolina baby. Major slave port. Where your beloved slavemasters did a whole lot of auctioning.


Then they bred them down home. Right here.

After the slaveholder had the shot at raping the women, they forced the best and strongest to "breed."

Of course they landed slave ships in the South. That's where most of the slaves were sold. Then they headed to the Caribbean to pick up molasses, and then they returned to Boston or Nantucket where their owners and crews lived.

Yankees owned the slave trade. Yankees are the ones who sailed to Africa to purchase human beings, and then packed them into ships in utterly inhuman conditions. A good percentage of the cargo died before it ever reached America.

 

[Syriusly]

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist asshole.

I love how anyone that disagrees with you on anything at all is automatically declared a lover of Hitler and/or Stalin


You're one of my favorite members here, simply because you are so ludicrous.

I wonder what comic book it was that Brit learned all he knows about Stalin from?

 

[bripat9643]

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

 

[Syriusly]

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

The Confederate Constitution forbade the importation of African slaves- except it explicitly allowed for the importation of slaves from other slave states.
...

The South had no problem with banning the overseas slave trade. They were breeding them here. More money to be made.

Didn't want outside competition.

That's because the slave trade was head quartered in New England.

Bullshit.

South Carolina baby. Major slave port. Where your beloved slavemasters did a whole lot of auctioning.


Then they bred them down home. Right here.

After the slaveholder had the shot at raping the women, they forced the best and strongest to "breed."

Of course they landed slave ships in the South. That's where most of the slaves were sold. Then they headed to the Caribbean to pick up molasses, and then they returned to Boston or Nantucket where their owners and crews lived.

Yankees owned the slave trade. Yankees are the ones who sailed to Africa to purchase human beings, and then packed them into ships in utterly inhuman conditions. A good percentage of the cargo died before it ever reached America.

Wow....you have the wierdest partisan blinders of all.

You blame those who transported the slaves in the horrible inhuman conditions your describe.....but in this entire thread- you have not condemned the Southern auctioners who held slaves in inhuman conditions, or those Southerners who held slaves in inhuman conditions.

There is no denying the culpability of the entire United States in the slave trade- our entire nation was involved.

But by 1860- there was no real African trade slave to the United States- the slave trade was slaves being sold within the United States- by Southerners to other Southerners- mostly moving from the East Coast to the terrible conditions of the cotton plantations along the Mississippi.

I don't have a problem with pointing out that 'Yankee's were involved also- but you are so blind in your hatred that you can only blame 'the North'.

 

[paperview]

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

It was NEGATIVED.

Do you understand that???

Holy shit. Talk about dense.

 

[bripat9643]

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

It was NEGATIVED.

Do you understand that???

Holy shit. Talk about dense.

It's in the fucking document that New York voted on and ratified, moron.

What the hell is "negatived" supposed to mean, your boot-licking heroes objected to it?

 

[paperview]

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

It was NEGATIVED.

Do you understand that???

Holy shit. Talk about dense.

It's in the fucking document that New York voted on and ratified, moron.

What the hell is "negatived" supposed to mean, your boot-licking heroes objected to it?

*sigh*


Again...

I'll trot it out here again, as many times as I need to -- you won't care, as we know you're a neo-confederate window licker, but for the others:


The direct question of unilateral secession - when posed, was answered when NY was considering it's ratification of the Constitution. At that time it was proposed:

"there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

A vote was taken, and it was negatived.

Elliot s Debates Volume 2 Teaching American History

Historian Amar goes on to explain the pivotal moment of agreement:

"But exactly how were these states united? Did a state that said yes in the 1780's retain the right to unilaterally say no later on, and thereby secede? If not, why not?

Once again, it was in New York that the answer emerged most emphatically. At the outset of the Poughkeepsie convention, anti-Federalists held a strong majority. The tide turned when word arrived that New Hampshire and Virginia had said yes to the Constitution, at which point anti-Federalists proposed a compromise: they would vote to ratify, but if the new federal government failed to embrace various reforms that they favored, "there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

At the risk of alienating swing voters and losing on the ultimate ratification vote, Federalists emphatically opposed the compromise.

In doing so, they made clear to everyone - in New York and in the 12 other states where people were following the New York contest with interest - that the Constitution did not permit unilateral state secession.

Alexander Hamilton read aloud a letter at the Poughkeepsie convention that he had received from James Madison stating that "the Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever."

Hamilton and John Jay then added their own words, which the New York press promptly reprinted: "a reservation of a right to withdraw" was "inconsistent with the Constitution, and was no ratification."

Thus, it was New York where the document became an irresistible reality and where its central meaning - one nation, democratic and indivisible - emerged with crystal clarity."

Conventional Wisdom--A Commentary - Yale Law School

 

[bripat9643]

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

It was NEGATIVED.

Do you understand that???

Holy shit. Talk about dense.

It's in the fucking document that New York voted on and ratified, moron.

What the hell is "negatived" supposed to mean, your boot-licking heroes objected to it?

*sigh*


Again...

I'll trot it out here again, as many times as I need to -- you won't care, as we know you're a neo-confederate window licker, but for the others:


The direct question of unilateral secession - when posed, was answered when NY was considering it's ratification of the Constitution. At that time it was proposed:

"there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

A vote was taken, and it was negatived.

Elliot s Debates Volume 2 Teaching American History

Historian Amar goes on to explain the pivotal moment of agreement:

"But exactly how were these states united? Did a state that said yes in the 1780's retain the right to unilaterally say no later on, and thereby secede? If not, why not?

Once again, it was in New York that the answer emerged most emphatically. At the outset of the Poughkeepsie convention, anti-Federalists held a strong majority. The tide turned when word arrived that New Hampshire and Virginia had said yes to the Constitution, at which point anti-Federalists proposed a compromise: they would vote to ratify, but if the new federal government failed to embrace various reforms that they favored, "there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

At the risk of alienating swing voters and losing on the ultimate ratification vote, Federalists emphatically opposed the compromise.

In doing so, they made clear to everyone - in New York and in the 12 other states where people were following the New York contest with interest - that the Constitution did not permit unilateral state secession.

Alexander Hamilton read aloud a letter at the Poughkeepsie convention that he had received from James Madison stating that "the Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever."

Hamilton and John Jay then added their own words, which the New York press promptly reprinted: "a reservation of a right to withdraw" was "inconsistent with the Constitution, and was no ratification."

Thus, it was New York where the document became an irresistible reality and where its central meaning - one nation, democratic and indivisible - emerged with crystal clarity."

Conventional Wisdom--A Commentary - Yale Law School

All your mumbo jumbo doesn't mean a damn thing. The clause is in the document that New York voted on and ratified.

 

[Correll]

QUOTE="Skylar: "Oh, and there's no constitutional right to secede. When NY was debating the ratification of the US constitution NY included a provision for unilateral withdrawl from the union after a 'certain number of years'. Hamilton and the Federalists opposed the inclusion of this passage. With Madison stating in a letter read for the convention by Hamilton himself which stated 'the Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever".

New York eventually ratified the new constitution without the provision for withdraw. It was expressly understood by the founders that at the time of the ratification of the constitution that there was no right to unilaterally withdraw. The right to withdraw was an expressly ANTI-federalist position, strongly advocated by anti-federalists like Patrick Henry.

The Anti-federalists lost.

Our federal constitution is overwhelmingly the product of the Federal perspective. With James Madison the 'father of the constitution' expressly, publically, and openly making it clear that unilateral withdraw wasn't an option upon ratification.

States did not retain the sovereignty they had before ratification. If an amendment was passed, those States that voted against the amendment were still bound to it. The fundamental change from State sovereignty with the ratification of the constitution has also been codified by the USSC. And BEFORE the secession of South Carolina, which means that it created binding precedent UPON South Carolina:

Reference has been made to the political situation of these states, anterior to [the Constitution's] formation. It has been said that they were sovereign, were completely independent, and were connected with each other only by a league. This is true. But, when these allied sovereigns converted their league into a government, when they converted their congress of ambassadors, deputed to deliberate on their common concerns, and to recommend measures of general utility, into a legislature, empowered to enact laws on the most interesting subjects, the whole character in which the states appear underwent a change."

Those arguing that a constitutional right of secession existing must ignore Madison and the USSC to hold such a position."


Great post.

"expressly understood"?

So, they did not put in any language to put their position into the Constitution.

And, then years later, an organ of the government ruled to increase their own power...


This is not convincing to me.

A contract that once entered, you cannot revoke under penalty of war, that point should be very clearly spelled out.

Article VI, Clause 2. :

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Clause 3 of Article VI:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. [My emphasis]

State officers have to swear an oath (or affirmation) to support the federal Constitution. State sovereignty is subordinate to the federal government.

And in the words of James Madison himself:

“[T]he Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever.

I like what Madison said. That was very, very clear. "In toto, and for ever".

If that was in the Constitution, then the ramifications would have been clear to those that signed it.

There is no such language in your excerpt from the Constitution.

I can see how such language COULD BE interpreted to support the idea that the states legislators, would be required to resist any session movement.

But, it is still implied, at best, and a matter of judgement as to whether it means that.

The quote from Madison was in direct reply to the question if a state could secede.

NY wanted that provision to be written in at the time of the Constitutional Ratification.

Answer: NO.

“[T]he Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever." - James Madison, affirmed by Hamilton.


I really don't care if you're "unconvinced" -- the Civil War answered the question. Soundly.

If Lincoln had not been assassinated we would not have African Americans today. It was his intention to round them up and return all of them to Africa. As it was he removed hundreds.

Abraham Lincoln wanted to deport slaves to new colonies - Telegraph

That was bullshit

It was never a practical option

That is not the point silly senior dude.

The point is, which sadly I must spell it out for you due to you lack of...something, Lincoln considered deporting all blacks and hoped to get it accomplished in his second term. It was not practical, but it should tell you something about your beloved Dishonest Abe, but you being you, I have no hope.

Actually, the country of Liberia was formed for free slaves

Lincoln understood what bunch of racist assholes existed in the south and doubted if blacks could ever be "free" there. As it is, Lincoln was right and it took force 100 years later to finally give blacks freedom in the south

ROFL! So Lincoln's plan to send them back to Africa was to protect them from American racists? I've got news for you, bub, Lincoln was a white supremacist:

“I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

Abraham Lincoln, Charlston IL, 1858​

If Lincoln had not been assassinated we would not have African Americans today. It was his intention to round them up and return all of them to Africa. As it was he removed hundreds.

Abraham Lincoln wanted to deport slaves to new colonies - Telegraph

That was bullshit

It was never a practical option

That is not the point silly senior dude.

The point is, which sadly I must spell it out for you due to you lack of...something, Lincoln considered deporting all blacks and hoped to get it accomplished in his second term. It was not practical, but it should tell you something about your beloved Dishonest Abe, but you being you, I have no hope.

Actually, the country of Liberia was formed for free slaves

Lincoln understood what bunch of racist assholes existed in the south and doubted if blacks could ever be "free" there. As it is, Lincoln was right and it took force 100 years later to finally give blacks freedom in the south

ROFL! So Lincoln's plan to send them back to Africa was to protect them from American racists? I've got news for you, bub, Lincoln was a white supremacist:

“I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this, that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

Abraham Lincoln, Charlston IL, 1858​

:ROFLOL:

Lincoln said that in 1858. He changed! After attaining the presidency and dealing with the Southern Bahs-turds, his speeches were positively geared towards Black suffrage in postbellum America.

Some twelve thousand voters in the heretofore slave-state of Louisiana have sworn allegiance to the Union, assumed to be the rightful political power of the State, held elections, organized a State government, adopted a free-state constitution, giving the benefit of public schools equally to black and white, and empowering the Legislature to confer the elective franchise upon the colored man. Their Legislature has already voted to ratify the constitutional amendment recently passed by Congress, abolishing slavery throughout the nation. These twelve thousand persons are thus fully committed to the Union, and to perpetual freedom in the state--committed to the very things, and nearly all the things the nation wants--and they ask the nations recognition and it's assistance to make good their committal. Now, if we reject, and spurn them, we do our utmost to disorganize and disperse them. We in effect say to the white men "You are worthless, or worse--we will neither help you, nor be helped by you." To the blacks we say "This cup of liberty which these, your old masters, hold to your lips, we will dash from you, and leave you to the chances of gathering the spilled and scattered contents in some vague and undefined when, where, and how." If this course, discouraging and paralyzing both white and black, has any tendency to bring Louisiana into proper practical relations with the Union, I have, so far, been unable to perceive it. If, on the contrary, we recognize, and sustain the new government of Louisiana the converse of all this is made true. We encourage the hearts, and nerve the arms of the twelve thousand to adhere to their work, and argue for it, and proselyte for it, and fight for it, and feed it, and grow it, and ripen it to a complete success. The colored man too, in seeing all united for him, is inspired with vigilance, and energy, and daring, to the same end. Grant that he desires the elective franchise, will he not attain it sooner by saving the already advanced steps toward it, than by running backward over them? Concede that the new government of Louisiana is only to what it should be as the egg is to the fowl, we shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg than by smashing it? Again, if we reject Louisiana, we also reject one vote in favor of the proposed amendment to the national Constitution. To meet this proposition, it has been argued that no more than three fourths of those States which have not attempted secession are necessary to validly ratify the amendment. I do not commit myself against this, further than to say that such a ratification would be questionable, and sure to be persistently questioned; while a ratification by three-fourths of all the States would be unquestioned and unquestionable.

Abraham Lincoln- April 11, 1865-

That's a pretty big change of world view in just a few years.

If he was not changing in a direction you liked, you might suspect him of lying at least one of those times...

Some of his earlier speeches were pretty fire brand abolitionist too....

It's almost like he was against slavery before he was for it, and then against it again.

 

[NYcarbineer]

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

A PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS the laws of the United States have been, for some time past, and now are opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by law.

Now, therefore, I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the militia of the several States of the Union, to the aggregate number of seventy-five thousand, in order to suppress said combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed.

The details for this object will be immediately communicated to the State authorities through the War Department.

I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our National Union, and the perpetuity of popular government; and to redress wrongs already long enough endured. I deem it proper to say that the first service assigned to the forces hereby called forth will probably be to repossess the forts, places, and property which have been seized from the Union; and in every event, the utmost care will be observed, consistently with the objects aforesaid, to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property, or any disturbance of peaceful citizens in any part of the country.

And I hereby command the persons composing the combinations aforesaid to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within twenty days from this date.

Deeming that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, I do hereby, in virtue of the power in me vested by the Constitution, convene both Houses of Congress. Senators and Representatives are therefore summoned to assemble at their respective chambers, at twelve o'clock, noon, on Thursdays the fourth day of July next, then and there to consider and determine such measures as, in their wisdom, the public safety and interest may seem to demand.

By the President:ABRAHAM LINCOLN
Secretary of State WILLIAM H. SEWARD

You may be correct about that. However, he still had no permission from Congress to invade a State of the Union.

Yeah, I'm correct about that and you're wrong.

& The Constitution gave him that permission, neo-confed.

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

Really?

So you're telling me that the State of New York could vote to secede from the Union,

and in the process dissolve my US citizenship, and replace it with a citizenship in the new nation of NY,

and, if they so chose, they could eradicate my 2nd amendment rights?

 

[Correll]

It gave him permission to raise the militia, not to invade Virginia, Stalinist bootlicker.

Your screed about New York turned out to be total bullshit, didn't it?

No, it didn't you lying scumbucket.

I just quoted the New York ratification document. It reserves the right of the people to secede from the Union.

It was NEGATIVED.

Do you understand that???

Holy shit. Talk about dense.

It's in the fucking document that New York voted on and ratified, moron.

What the hell is "negatived" supposed to mean, your boot-licking heroes objected to it?

*sigh*


Again...

I'll trot it out here again, as many times as I need to -- you won't care, as we know you're a neo-confederate window licker, but for the others:


The direct question of unilateral secession - when posed, was answered when NY was considering it's ratification of the Constitution. At that time it was proposed:

"there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

A vote was taken, and it was negatived.

Elliot s Debates Volume 2 Teaching American History

Historian Amar goes on to explain the pivotal moment of agreement:

"But exactly how were these states united? Did a state that said yes in the 1780's retain the right to unilaterally say no later on, and thereby secede? If not, why not?

Once again, it was in New York that the answer emerged most emphatically. At the outset of the Poughkeepsie convention, anti-Federalists held a strong majority. The tide turned when word arrived that New Hampshire and Virginia had said yes to the Constitution, at which point anti-Federalists proposed a compromise: they would vote to ratify, but if the new federal government failed to embrace various reforms that they favored, "there should be reserved to the state of New York a right to withdraw herself from the union after a certain number of years."

At the risk of alienating swing voters and losing on the ultimate ratification vote, Federalists emphatically opposed the compromise.

In doing so, they made clear to everyone - in New York and in the 12 other states where people were following the New York contest with interest - that the Constitution did not permit unilateral state secession.

Alexander Hamilton read aloud a letter at the Poughkeepsie convention that he had received from James Madison stating that "the Constitution requires an adoption in toto, and for ever."

Hamilton and John Jay then added their own words, which the New York press promptly reprinted: "a reservation of a right to withdraw" was "inconsistent with the Constitution, and was no ratification."

Thus, it was New York where the document became an irresistible reality and where its central meaning - one nation, democratic and indivisible - emerged with crystal clarity."

Conventional Wisdom--A Commentary - Yale Law School

Ya know what would have REALLY, REALLY, REALLY made it clear to everyone?

Including words clearly stating what they intended.

 

[toxicmedia]

Because he knew the Constitution did not allow him that option.

It also didn't allow him the option of raising an army without Congress's approval and then invading a state with it.

The Constitution gave that power to Congress- and Congress passed the Militia Acts of 1792 and 1795- which did allow the President to call out the militias as Lincoln did

The 75,000 man army Lincoln raised was not the state militias. It was paid by the Federal government and reported to the federal government. It was a federal army raised without the permission of Congress and it was sent to invade a state of the union, which is an act of treason.

It's interesting that this 'treasonous' president you so hate is considered by the majority of Americans to one of, if not THE, best presidents we've ever had. I wonder why more people don't see it the way you do..

They've all been brainwashed in government schools. Did you know that children in Japan don't know a thing about the rape of Nanking or the comfort women of Korea?

That's the kind of ignorance that results when government writes your history books.

What you seem to think is not dissimilar to the type of delusions almost all mental patients have. "The government is involved in some plot to decieve you"

Private schools are every bit as likely to teach biased curriculum, as public schools are. In fact, any school teacher anywhere can teach bised curriculum, unless you're a student in Texas Public Schools, and you'll hear what the local preacher told the school board to teach.

Bit I'll give you the benefit of the doubt regarding your sanity, and guess you're probably just like anyone else who will believe right wing revisionists because you want to. It's very human to believe that which reinforces what you would like to be true.

But people have tried to complicate simple realities, that are exhaustivelly documented in the writings of people at the time......which is why the Civil War started.

The people of the South were not evil, or noble, in any significant ways. It does not matter if they were slavers or not. They had standards of morality that vary from today's, but things change.

Same goes for the people of the North back in those days, yet they fought each other for 4 years, and killed each other by the tens of thousands in battles.

The south seceeded because thet felt economically compromised by the North, and one of the issues that made the South feel threatened included regulations, proposed regulations, or proposed prohibition to slavery practices. Southern politicians sold it as "states rights", and Northern politicians sold it as "preserving the union".

The arguments regarding the influence of slavery in the justifications for secession are not indicators of whether or not Southerners were moral people. They were, in general, no more or less moral than the average for people of that day.

Having said all that...if you've removed the influence of slavery from your own understanding of the justifications for secession....simply to support your hatred for blacks...you're a filthy excuse for a human being, and I hope you die alone.

 

[paperview]

Here's some more light reading for you, neo confed give a finger toddler:

"Let’s now consider New York: “That the Powers of Government may be reassumed by the People, whensoever it shall become necessary to their Happiness; that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same; And that those Clauses in the said Constitution, which declare, that Congress shall not have or exercise certain Powers, do not imply that Congress is entitled to any Powers not given by the said Constitution; but such Clauses are to be construed either as exceptions to certain specified Powers, or as inserted merely for greater Caution.” When they are speaking of the people within states they use the phrase “of the several states.” Since that phrase is absent when they discuss the powers of government being reassumed by “the People,” they are clearly referring to the people of the United States en masse.

Is there any support for this? Yes!

During the New York ratification convention, there was a move to propose amendments, and to reserve a right to withdraw from the Union if these amendments were not accepted. Alexander Hamilton wrote to James Madison about this, and Madison replied

, “My opinion is that a reservation of a right to withdraw if amendments be not decided on under the form of the Constitution within a certain time, is a conditional ratification, that it does not make N. York a member of the New Union, and consequently that she could not be received on that plan. Compacts must be reciprocal, this principle would not in such a case be preserved. The Constitution requires an adoption in toto and for ever.

It has been so adopted by the other States. An adoption for a limited time would be as defective as an adoption of some of the articles only. In short any condition whatever must viciate [sic] the ratification. What the New Congress by virtue of the power to admit new States, may be able & disposed to do in such case, I do not enquire as I suppose that is not the material point at present. I have not a moment to add more than my fervent wishes for your success & happiness.


“This idea of reserving right to withdraw was started in Richmd. & considered as a conditional ratification which was itself considered as worse than a rejection.” [James Madison to Alexander Hamilton, July 20, 1788]

Notice how Madison says the idea of reserving a right to withdraw was considered and rejected in the Virginia Ratification Convention. The proposal to reserve a right to withdraw was defeated in the New York convention as well."

More: Did the States Reserve a Right to Secede Student of the American Civil War

 

[NYcarbineer]

This thread is a poignant reminder of how much conservatives hate the United States of America.

 

[toxicmedia]

This thread is a poignant reminder of how much conservatives hate the United States of America.

They like white Christian Republican Americans, and everybody else...they range from tolerating them, to hating them

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's fascinating to hear conservatives express the opinion that the 2nd amendment is little more than a suggestion.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Total *$*#^ from the man who is famously quoted as saying "people never talk about the "good aspects" of slavery."

No, it happens to be fact. Go read those states' ordinances/declarations of causes. It's in black and white.

And this gross distortion about my comments regarding the aspects of slavery has been answered before. People can read the original statement in Slavery and Southern Independence.

Sure free States Could join the the Union -- as SLAVE STATES. Slavery was a guarantee in the CSA.

Wrong again. Free states could join the Confederacy as free states. The "guarantee" of slavery that you keep mischaracterizing was that slaveholders could temporarily travel in free Confederate states with their slaves and that the national government could not abolish slavery in any state without the state's consent.

The Confederates Constitution ensured slavery in perpetuity.

Wrong yet again. The CSA Constitution allowed for Confederate states to abolish slavery if they so desired. When the Confederate debate on emancipation became widespread in 1864, both sides acknowledged this fact.

As for your fiction about the right of secession, try this short article for starters:

Proof that the Union was Supposed to be Voluntary