For all you secessiontards, sorry, but there is no legal mechanism that allows a state to secede

On this, Lincoln had it wrong, just because he said it doesn't mean he was right. He did many things, that was unlawful during the war. Everyone that disagreed with him, this was in the north, was put in prison for the duration of the war.

The War was not because of secession, it was start before secession from the union. I was tariffs then later in the war it was slavery, but only in the south.

Mind you a lot of southerner, didn't like slavery it was slowly coming to an end and poor south whites couldn't get jobs.

Last Edited by Daughter on 11/10/2012 10:21 PM

When people want something that is not available by legal means, they will suffice with violence. The second civil war is just a gunshot away.

and why don't you stop quoting a President who died in 1865, nearly 150 years ago, a president who was willing to kill millions of his own countrymen, declare martial law, suspend habeas corpus, who ordered the arrest of the entire legislature of Maryland for simply disagreeing with him and even went so far as to direct his generals to use rape as a legitimate warfare against the civilians of the south




Last Edited by IssueX on 11/10/2012 10:23 PM

The states voted to enter. They can just vote to leave.

The problem with the Confederate states is that the people weren't allowed to vote to leave.

I don't believe we will ever secede but Texans are and should be always Texans first and Americans second.

yah lincoln the same man who threw all the press in prison because they protested the war

Now go read the declaration of independence

Nothing new there. The Continental Army routinely laid waste to Tory farmsteads after having the deed signed over to the commanding officer, the women raped and men killed.

Rape, pillage and destroy has been a tactic since the dawn of war.

Prima facie evidence that our "greatest" president started the most violent war in U.S. history because he "held" that secession was illegal.

It was admittedly a flaw in the initial construction of the Constitution that secession was not expressly discussed, but logically, if a group of states are voting to join together into a union, The Constitution of which expressly reserves most rights to those states, they would maintain the ability to leave the Union if it no longer represented the interests of the state's citizens.

But OP is right in the sense that the argument is academic. Any attempts to secede would be met by immediate military occupation by the federal government. Thanks for setting that precedent, Abe.

This!

Not if there is WAR,not that I am calling for it ,I'm just saying.......

Rape as a weapon may exist since the age of savages, but it sure doesn't make Lincoln the saint many pretend he is

If a modern president had tried half the stunts Lincoln did, he would be decried as a vicious tyrant for the rest of time


[link to www.crf-usa.org]

On September 24, 1862, Lincoln issued a proclamation unprecedented in American history.

He suspended the writ of liberty everywhere in the United States. The suspension applied to Confederate spies or to those who aided the rebel cause, interfered with military enlistments, resisted the draft, or were "guilty of any disloyal practice."

This last offense allowed the military to arrest newspaper editors and speakers critical of the Union war effort. Lincoln further ordered that persons arrested under his proclamation were subject to martial law, which meant they would be tried and punished by military courts.



[link to www.thehistoryforum.com]

Many Constitutional violations against Maryland

'Maryland my Maryland' was published calling Lincoln a tyrant and a despot and a vandal.

Lincoln as already mentioned, trashed the Constitution by suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus and sending troops door to door confiscating weapons in areas of Maryland.

Maryland was a Union state.

Lincoln ordered the arrest of thousands Marylanders for the crime of 'suspected Southern sympathies'.

Lincoln ordered the arrest of US Congressman Henry May representing Maryland. #7

Lincoln also had arrested...

Most of the Maryland State Legislature #8

Most of the Baltimore city council #9

The police commissioner of Baltimore #10

The mayor of Baltimore #11

Thousands of prominent Maryland citizens. #12

These people were arrested and held in Military prisons, without trial, some of them for years.

This trashing of the Constitution upset many Marylanders. One of them was named Booth.

April 25 1861, When it looks as though Maryland may secede from the Union, Lincoln sends a letter to General Winfield Scott giving him permission to bombard Maryland's Cities.

This war criminal Lincoln couldn't wait to bombard innocent civilians. We call that Terrorism these days.

....

Last Edited by IssueX on 11/10/2012 10:38 PM

Not so sure there. Read the Patriot Act?

Enough states can dismantle it and form another one. This is true. I only exists because of the states, it in the advent it is not the government that suits the states or the people, because of many different reasons, one would be the will of the governed have been trampled on, taxation without representation, an over stepping of federal power into state rights and out of controlled judicial system and more.

What else needs to be said!

The declaration of independence was a writ of appeal to God for the redress of grievances, in effect an anullment between two peoples. They were two peoples divided by culture, geography, and political structure. Remember taxation without representation? That was a slogan of the colonists because they were not PART OF england, but rather colonies OF england. In essence they were saying either marry us to england or set us free from our bonds of engagement. They were never one people. The declaration was the last in a series of appeals that had been addressed to the king, parliament, and lower authorities before working its way up to the final supreme authority, God himself.

Secession, however is not even close to the declaration of independence in legal stature. The states are already married. the people are one. A perpetual union is the bond of marriage of where the two peoples became one..and it began with the articles of Association in 1774 almost 2 years before the declaration of Independence. There is no mechanism for national divorce in such occurance. Simply put, the union endures forever.

Yes, we did. Delegates were elected to secession conventions. We wanted out, and it was, and is, legal.

Sure...and the left called Bush a tyrant for paving the way for the Patriot Act, which I agree is a dangerous document

however Bush never went so far as to arrest thousands of newspaper editors, legislators and judges who disagreed with him....

imagine if he had

and yet we overlook what Lincoln did in the months soon after his election, all in the name of preserving the union

It would be like a man beating his wife to unconsciousness simply because she wanted to divorce him for being a violent husband...sure the marriage is preserved, but at what cost?

I'm not saying this will happen today, but if you look into the history of the mid 19th century, there was nothing in the document signed by the first colonies which prohibited them from leaving if they so desired

I doubt, having just fought such a painful war with Britain to gain independence, they would have knowingly and willingly joined a union which promised to be even more tyranical if they wished to leave...

The Declaration of Independence was a statement by British subjects that they no longer desired to be British subjects, and that they had not only the legal right to do so, but the moral imperative. When people want out, they will do what they need. Since the Declaration did not gain independence, the colonists took to muskets.

Your wrong you just don't know where to look
According to Smith & Wesson 45 arthured by Colt we can....
If you would like to argue this it must be done in person...
Yeah thought you might see things my way...

You see government and law only works if those giving the orders feel safe... Once the are face to face with the real men of the country they will piss thier pants and beg for forgiveness....
There will be no forgiveness.....
Don't Tread On Me Bitch!

OF course we can vote to leave, legally. But the federal government will not recognize that fact.

They didn't hesitate to wage war on our civilians before and likely would not as well.

War criminals--check out the Admiral that declared rape legal in New Orleans because the women hated the crude union soldiers.

But if you can vote yourself in, you can vote yourself out.

This is a total misunderstanding of the Union. First of all, the consitutional convention and the states subsequent ratification post-date the formation of the union. The Union began with the articles of association in 1774. When you create a corporation, which is a seperate legal person, the inception of it is filed with your secretary of states office under articles of association. At this point, the corporation comes into being. It is a single entity.

This entity (the Union) later declared independence...entered into a form of government called the articles of confederation...then dissolved that and replaced it with a new constitutional form of government...but it is and always has been one entity. A state can no more secede from the union than a hand or a foot can decide to secede from the body. Their are many parts, but they are all one body. One nation. Indivisible.

The colonies were an integral part of the British Empire, the people here were overwhelmingly the descendants of immigrants that had their origins in the British Isles, England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. They were united with the peoples of Britain under the authority of the Crown. As such, the Declaration of Independence was a writ of secession, no different from that of the Southern States in 1860 and 1861. When Virginia and New York adopted the Constitution they placed in their Articles of Ratification the caveat that if the States ever considered the union to be detrimental to the well being of the States, they reserved the right to break the bonds of union. This was agreed to by the Constitutional Convention, thus acknowledging the Right of Secession for all the States. Your argument is baseless and ill-informed.

There is no legal mechanism to prevent them either.

That's why you end up using an army.

Here’s a little known fact about “Saint Abraham”:

When General Benjamin “Beast” Butler issued an order declaring all the women of New Orleans to be prostitutes because they refused to genuflect to his occupying soldiers on the streets, Lincoln refused to rescind the order despite international pressure to do so. The order was a license to rape.

But worse, the tactic proved so successful in demoralizing the population, Lincoln suggested other generals follow suit when subduing the population in other states as well

When I was researching this topic, I was told to look up the "rape letters" from 1860s, in Columbia South Carolina

I could hardly believe my own government had participated in this level of cruelty against their own population....it changed the way I viewed the story of the Civil War I had been taught forever

Your wrong. The colonies were posessions of Britian, but they were no more part of britian than Guam or Peurto Rico are part of the U.S.A....if Puerto Rico decided to opt for independece, this would be way different than if Florida voted to secede, because Florida is part of the union, puerto Rico is not, but merely a territory and has never gained admission to the Union as a state.

The proof of this is in the fact that the colonies had no representation in Parliament.

And as far as reserving the right to break the bonds of Union at the constitutional convention...this is erroneous too because the constitutional convention did not establish the Union. It was established in 1774...not 1787.

The Articles of Association did not form the Union, read them. This is an agreement to boycott British goods, not a contract for perpetual union. How you can get that from this document is a mystery. And how you can really believe that the colonies were not legally subject to the British Crown is also a mystery. You logic is flawed and your argument is weak.

As you wrote
"Continue to execute all the express provisions of our national Constitution, and the Union will endure forever"

I ask you...When did we go back to using the Constitution

The boycott was merely the first act of the Union, but the legal lineage of the Union traces back here to it's inception. Don't take my word for it...take Lincoln's (once again from his first Inaugural Adress):

"The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured ... by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was "to form a more perfect Union."