Reply With QuoteNo, the state would be independent and free from any relationship with the Constitution of the United States.Originally Posted by Riven37
Doesn't The 10th amendment guarantees states rights in all things outside the Constitution. Secession of a state will nullify the state's rights under the Constitution, which is the contract drafted by the states that resulted in the federal government. Wouldn't this nullify the stats protection under the Constitution ?
Riven37
_________
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson
No, the state would be independent and free from any relationship with the Constitution of the United States.
I love the fact that he brought up Francis Bellamy. When I was a youngster, kids got paddled in front of the entire class if they did not fully comply with the pledge of allegiance recital to the acceptance of the teacher. I wonder what the punishment is nowadays? Anti-depressants?
It's no coincidence that Bellamy was on the MA board of education. Socialists like good company.
I asked my son (non-government school student) if anyone has ever been punished in his class for screwing-up the pledge recital. He laughed, saying "nobody has ever said it wrong". WTF?!?
Time for some un-education.
Most of all I like bulldozers and dirt
Show me where The Constitution of the United States of America makes a provision for the succession of a state. Also, how is seceding from the Union not a federal matter? Thus nullifying any argument based on the 10th Amendment.
The Constitution is not a two-way contract for valuable consideration. In other words, it's not the kind of arms-length transaction Ron Paul and his deluded followers pretend it to be. In not less words, Ron Paul's "Constitution", a co-equal agreement between the states and a federal government, is belied by historical fact and legal precedent.
But I hope they keep talking succession. It will do wonders for killing the stupid movement.
One beautiful thing about having a government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations is that every disaster is measured in terms of economic loss. It's sort of like getting your arm sheared off in a car accident and thinking, "Damn, now it'll take longer to fold the laundry" as blood spurts from your arteries. - The Rude Pundit
The state would also most likely be easily crushed, dismantled and re-assumed, with penalties, by the American government. So? It's an absurd notion that, by historical precedent, amounts to treason. But, whatevs.
I don't worry, however. It's pretty plain that those talking about succession have neither the where-with-all, the balls or the intelligence to give these dumb thoughts any traction - except on FOX News, perhaps.
Whatevs.
One beautiful thing about having a government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations is that every disaster is measured in terms of economic loss. It's sort of like getting your arm sheared off in a car accident and thinking, "Damn, now it'll take longer to fold the laundry" as blood spurts from your arteries. - The Rude Pundit
I don't think succession is mentioned anywhere. Nor is secession.
You can argue this point until you are blue, and I'm sure you will. The Federal government can only stop secession through the use of military force, as witnessed from 1861 to 1865.The U.S. Constitution does not expressly recognize or deny a right of secession. Accordingly, the argument for a right of unilateral secession begins (and pretty much ends) with a claim about the very nature of the Constitution.
Most of all I like bulldozers and dirt
Oof! Whoops. Talk about a slave to phonetics. . . *hangs head in shame*
BTW, you are correct in saying that secession is not addressed by the US Constitution.
What perhaps, do you think the federal government's reasoning was in using force during the War of Northern Aggression? (Hint: Article III, Section 3 was cited more than a few times.)
One beautiful thing about having a government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations is that every disaster is measured in terms of economic loss. It's sort of like getting your arm sheared off in a car accident and thinking, "Damn, now it'll take longer to fold the laundry" as blood spurts from your arteries. - The Rude Pundit
The word secession is not in the constitution but it is in the Deceleration of Independence and I quote
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."
Yes that is the 1st sentence in the Deceleration of independence.
Also Ron Paul brining up the pledge is the beginning to a great discussion.
If you did not know the original version is "'I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." nothing about god. Also the original salute was not the hand over your heart but a salute very similar to the Nazi salute. If you do not believe me do a search for pledge of allegiance salute http://images.google.com/images?sour...-8&sa=N&tab=wi
You will see pictures like thisno the picture is not photoshopped these are actual pictures of children in school in the USA
Francis Bellamy made the pledge to push a National Socialist agenda and to help sell flags.
If you walk around in a forest with your eyes closed you will eventually walk in to a tree.
2 + 2 = 5
Jesus died for your sins I do it for your mere entertainment dollar (Doug Stanhope)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions