Why do liberals say secession is TREASON?

[Camp]

That statement proves you are completely delusional but then, one would have to completely delusional to believe Lincoln was great.

Secession is also the ultimate example of states rights and a great way to keep the federal govt in check.

...and that is why it must not be allowed.

We must have an UNCHECKED central government...so think the statists.

The Civil War was fought over your concept and opinion. Your side lost at the cost of blood and treasure. You fools are making all the same arguments made to bring about the Civil War. The south is not going to rise again. Get over it and abandon your delusional dreams.

 

[gipper]

Secession is also the ultimate example of states rights and a great way to keep the federal govt in check.

...and that is why it must not be allowed.

We must have an UNCHECKED central government...so think the statists.

The Civil War was fought over your concept and opinion. Your side lost at the cost of blood and treasure. You fools are making all the same arguments made to bring about the Civil War. The south is not going to rise again. Get over it and abandon your delusional dreams.

You are so ridiculous.

The south is not MY side.

I was brainwashed by the State in their indoctrination centers like you, but I chose to educate myself...unlike you.

Many of my ancestors fought for the North.

I have lived my entire life in Michigan.

The thing is I can think logically and you can't. Why is that?

 

[Camp]

Secession is also the ultimate example of states rights and a great way to keep the federal govt in check.

...and that is why it must not be allowed.

We must have an UNCHECKED central government...so think the statists.

The Civil War was fought over your concept and opinion. Your side lost at the cost of blood and treasure. You fools are making all the same arguments made to bring about the Civil War. The south is not going to rise again. Get over it and abandon your delusional dreams.

You are so ridiculous.

The south is not MY side.

I was brainwashed by the State in their indoctrination centers like you, but I chose to educate myself...unlike you.

Many of my ancestors fought for the North.

I have lived my entire life in Michigan.

The thing is I can think logically and you can't. Why is that?

Perhaps you are the brainwashed one. This thread is trying to argue that secession itself is not treason or illegal. However the defenders of that concept use theory and not the reality about how the southern states attempted secession. There is a difference. A person can break a contract if specific laws and protocol are used and the ruling authority approves that the breaking of the contract is legal. You can not just tear up the contract and claim that you have changed your mind and therefore will not abide by it. In any case, the parties of the civil war could not come to terms. The only answer was force of arms. Why anyone thinks that a century and a half later they can re-open the debate is just silly. Entire towns of young men gave their blood to establish the issue that secession was not acceptable and would not be allowed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Because the states that decided to leave had a contract with other states in the Union. The Union gave them blood and treasure when they needed protection. One party of an agreement does not have the right to just quit the contract and agreement for some arbitrary or random reason.

Silly you.

Amendment 10.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

There's nothing in the constitution that prohibits a state from leaving and so the right to do so is reserved by the states.

They chose treason instead. Shooting at federal troops is treason in the manner that they did.

Secession in and of itself is not treason.

The Supremacy Clause prohibits a State from leaving because the Supremacy Clauses binds a State to compliance with federal/Constitutional law and secession represents an arbitrary repudiation of those obligations.

Additionally, people in a state are residents, but above that they are US citizens. US citizens are protected by the US Constitution and federal law in all rights and privileges coming from that law.

No state can arbitrarily revoke a US citizen's citizenship and thus deny that citizen the rights, privileges, and protections that come with that citizenship.

 

[M14 Shooter]

if the promise of a republican form of government is broken
all bets are off

That only applies to states in the union; secession means you leave the union and so it no loger applies.

yes
breaking the promise is one of the reasons for secession

Um.... huh?

when a constitutional republic breaks down that is

Ah.... gotcha.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Secession is not making war.

Firing on federal facilities and troops is

Title of the topic?
Secession.
Its not treason..

It might not be treason, but it ain't legal either.

10th Amendment.
Nothing in the constitution prohibits secession; the right is retained by the state.

The rights of a state not delineated in the Constitution can only apply to the internal affairs of a state, not their relationship with other states.

Says who? When has the 10th amendment been so interpreted?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Liberals argue against the right of secession because they don't know American history and because most of them reject America's founding principles anyway. If this were 1776, most liberals would be siding with the British.

Secessionists are all full of shit, not one of them actually believes in any principle of secession. If they did they should have no problem with counties seceding from states.

Counties are political subdivisions of states, created by legislation by that state.
States are sovereign entities that elected to join the union, not political subdivisions created by congress.
Apples/oranges.

 

[Camp]

Liberals argue against the right of secession because they don't know American history and because most of them reject America's founding principles anyway. If this were 1776, most liberals would be siding with the British.

Secessionists are all full of shit, not one of them actually believes in any principle of secession. If they did they should have no problem with counties seceding from states.

Counties are political subdivisions of states, created by legislation by that state.
States are sovereign entities that elected to join the union, not political subdivisions created by congress.
Apples/oranges.

Give it up. One by one your creative imaginary and misinformed concepts get shot down. None of the states were sovereign states. The original 13 were colonies that together seceded and became a Union. All that followed were territories of the United States who applied for statehood and in so doing agreed to abide by the laws of the United States as passed by Congress and approved by SCOTUS. Do you really believe that you are going to think of some angle that will change over 150 years of accepted law?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Liberals argue against the right of secession because they don't know American history and because most of them reject America's founding principles anyway. If this were 1776, most liberals would be siding with the British.

Secessionists are all full of shit, not one of them actually believes in any principle of secession. If they did they should have no problem with counties seceding from states.

Counties are political subdivisions of states, created by legislation by that state.
States are sovereign entities that elected to join the union, not political subdivisions created by congress.
Apples/oranges.

Give it up. One by one your creative imaginary and misinformed concepts get shot down

This only means you know you cannot show how I am wrong.

None of the states were sovereign states

All of the states, being equal under the constitution. are sovereign states.
As proof, these states can at any time of their choosing, dissolve the federal government; should that happen, 50 sovereign states will remain.

 

[Camp]

Liberals argue against the right of secession because they don't know American history and because most of them reject America's founding principles anyway. If this were 1776, most liberals would be siding with the British.

Secessionists are all full of shit, not one of them actually believes in any principle of secession. If they did they should have no problem with counties seceding from states.

Counties are political subdivisions of states, created by legislation by that state.
States are sovereign entities that elected to join the union, not political subdivisions created by congress.
Apples/oranges.

Give it up. One by one your creative imaginary and misinformed concepts get shot down

This only means you know you cannot show how I am wrong.

None of the states were sovereign states

All of the states, being equal under the constitution. are sovereign states.
As proof, these states can at any time of their choosing, dissolve the federal government; should that happen, 50 sovereign states will remain.

You are claiming the states were sovereign before becoming states . They were not. They were colonies, subservient to the Crown or territories subservient to the United States. They became sovereign states with caveats after being accepted into the Union as states.

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
You are claiming the states were sovereign before becoming states . They were not. They were colonies, subservient to the Crown or territories subservient to the United States. They became sovereign states with caveats after being accepted into the Union as states.

False.

Treaty of Paris, 1783; both the crown and the states themselves recognized the states as independent and sovereign.
Article 1st:
His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof.

And under the Articles of Confederation:
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.


In granting powers to to the federal government though the constitution, the states did not give up their sovereignty in toto when entering into the union under the Constitution.

All of the states, being equal under the constitution. are sovereign states.
As proof, these states can at any time of their choosing, dissolve the federal government; should that happen, 50 sovereign states will remain.

 

[Syriusly]

Firing on federal facilities and troops is

Title of the topic?
Secession.
Its not treason..

It might not be treason, but it ain't legal either.

10th Amendment.
Nothing in the constitution prohibits secession; the right is retained by the state.

The rights of a state not delineated in the Constitution can only apply to the internal affairs of a state, not their relationship with other states.

Secession doesn't affect the other states. The idea that you can't quit the club is absurd and totalitarian..

To you and the cult of Confederate denialists.

Yet the issue has been argued for over 100 years the idea a state can't just decide to leave the Union has been settled.

Except for nutball cult members like yourself.

 

[Liminal]

Liberals argue against the right of secession because they don't know American history and because most of them reject America's founding principles anyway. If this were 1776, most liberals would be siding with the British.

Secessionists are all full of shit, not one of them actually believes in any principle of secession. If they did they should have no problem with counties seceding from states.

Counties are political subdivisions of states, created by legislation by that state.
States are sovereign entities that elected to join the union, not political subdivisions created by congress.
Apples/oranges.

The states you speak of are not, and never have been, independent sovereign states.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The states you speak of are, and never have been, independent sovereign states.

See post #131.

 

[Liminal]

The states you speak of are, and never have been, independent sovereign states.

See post #131.

In what way were they independent sovereign states? Were any of them responsible for their defense or foreign affairs? Did they have their own navies? I guess the word "sovereign" is being very loosely interpreted.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The states you speak of are, and never have been, independent sovereign states.

See post #131.

In what way were they independent sovereign states? Were any of them responsible for their defense or foreign affairs? Did they have their own navies? I guess the word "sovereign" is being very loosely interpreted.

Two timely, pertinent, relevant and authoritative sources prove your statement wrong and you still want to argue the point?
You can do better than that.

 

[Liminal]

[
You are claiming the states were sovereign before becoming states . They were not. They were colonies, subservient to the Crown or territories subservient to the United States. They became sovereign states with caveats after being accepted into the Union as states.

False.

Treaty of Paris, 1783; both the crown and the states themselves recognized the states as independent and sovereign.
Article 1st:
His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof.

And under the Articles of Confederation:
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.


In granting powers to to the federal government though the constitution, the states did not give up their sovereignty in toto when entering into the union under the Constitution.

All of the states, being equal under the constitution. are sovereign states.
As proof, these states can at any time of their choosing, dissolve the federal government; should that happen, 50 sovereign states will remain.

I guess the word "proof" is also subject to interpretation.

 

[Liminal]

The states you speak of are, and never have been, independent sovereign states.

See post #131.

In what way were they independent sovereign states? Were any of them responsible for their defense or foreign affairs? Did they have their own navies? I guess the word "sovereign" is being very loosely interpreted.

Two timely, pertinent, relevant and authoritative sources prove your statement wrong and you still want to argue the point?
You can do better than that.

No, I'd say you're still stuck at square one.

 

[Liminal]

It should be obvious to anyone, that if a state wants to legally leave the union, then it would have to enter into some kind of agreements and treaties with the other states.

 

[Camp]

[
You are claiming the states were sovereign before becoming states . They were not. They were colonies, subservient to the Crown or territories subservient to the United States. They became sovereign states with caveats after being accepted into the Union as states.

False.

Treaty of Paris, 1783; both the crown and the states themselves recognized the states as independent and sovereign.
Article 1st:
His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof.

And under the Articles of Confederation:
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.


In granting powers to to the federal government though the constitution, the states did not give up their sovereignty in toto when entering into the union under the Constitution.

All of the states, being equal under the constitution. are sovereign states.
As proof, these states can at any time of their choosing, dissolve the federal government; should that happen, 50 sovereign states will remain.

I guess the word "proof" is also subject to interpretation.

No, shootstupid is just ignoring that sovereign states have different definitions and can come with caveats and restriction. I can prove the sky is blue, unless it is a cloudy day or when night arrives. He simply refuses to acknowledge that the state never had the right to take away American citizenship, make foreign treaties, declare war or do many other things expressly given to the federal government. Don't even attempt to explain the concept of physical sovereignty and governmental sovereignty. To the stupid only the definition that is used for the specific agenda is relevant. Anything after that is just academic legal mumbo jumbo.