06-09-2003 07:06									#91
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Feel free to hold forth on any theories you may have on why those sovereign states who voluntarily associated with each other, without waiving their sovereignty, could not later choose to withdraw from that voluntary association. Perhaps in those sections of the Constitution dealing with the several States' obligation to the United States government? Aw, shucks, there ain't no such section. Oh well, guess you're SOL.

I always thought it went against human logic that leaders would establish a government with ways for its own destruction.

	06-09-2003 07:11									#92
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Since there was no waiver or relinquishment of sovereignty, and a reservation of all powers not expressly granted to the Federal government to the states or to the people, I believe that the states had the authority to renounce ties to the United States at any time their governments so chose.

They would of course lose any benefits of that association, but nothing in the Constitution as it existed at the time makes any state subordinate to the United States, or to any collection of states, except in very narrow and precise situations which are expressly described. (Supremacy Clause, Full Faith and Credit Clause, etc.)

	06-09-2003 07:14									#93
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by MrFun I always thought it went against human logic that leaders would establish a government with ways for its own destruction.

Look at the Articles of Confederation.

No destruction at all. Secession, not destruction. Those states which wanted to remain associated with the Union were all welcome to do so.

	06-09-2003 07:14									#94
	Support Apolyton

Bingo.

And Texas STILL retains the right.

	06-09-2003 07:14									#95
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: I always thought it went against human logic that leaders would establish a government with ways for its own destruction.

I always thought it was against human logic that leaders would establish a government with ways for the people to control it.

The whole point of the United States is that, unless efficiency is key, it's a national issue, or the preservation of the Union is at stake, rights increase as you go down levels--federal > state > local > citizen, each has an increase over the last (in the ideal setup.)

	06-09-2003 07:15									#96
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: or the preservation of the Union is at stake

Uh...I meant...well...from a foreign power?

	06-09-2003 07:24									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by mrmitchell I always thought it was against human logic that leaders would establish a government with ways for the people to control it. The whole point of the United States is that, unless efficiency is key, it's a national issue, or the preservation of the Union is at stake, rights increase as you go down levels--federal > state > local > citizen, each has an increase over the last (in the ideal setup.)

Um -- historically, rights have been stronger from higher levels of government.

Various times after the Civil War, it was the various individual state governments that set up laws to disfranchise citizens -- not the federal government.

	06-09-2003 07:47									#98
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Um -- historically, rights have been stronger from higher levels of government. Various times after the Civil War, it was the various individual state governments that set up laws to disfranchise citizens -- not the federal government.

Read the 9th Amendment to the Constitution. It was put there for a reason.

	06-09-2003 07:52									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

MrFun, I meant (and believe I said) FOR that level. Not the number of rights that level gives.

	06-09-2003 07:56									#100
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Since there was no waiver or relinquishment of sovereignty, and a reservation of all powers not expressly granted to the Federal government to the states or to the people, I believe that the states had the authority to renounce ties to the United States at any time their governments so chose. They would of course lose any benefits of that association, but nothing in the Constitution as it existed at the time makes any state subordinate to the United States, or to any collection of states, except in very narrow and precise situations which are expressly described. (Supremacy Clause, Full Faith and Credit Clause, etc.)

Your positon would make sense it the US was like an association you could join or quit. In a contract, one party cannot simply quit. There are good reasons for this.

	06-09-2003 07:58									#101
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I believe states should be allowed to secede. Military vessels and such should be removeable. But buildings and forts and such stay.

	06-09-2003 09:36									#102
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand Bingo. And Texas STILL retains the right.

GOOD! Get out and take Shrub with you! Don't wine to us when the mexicans come to take thier land back.

	06-09-2003 09:38									#103
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by TCO need to create another state to stay at 50. How about the UP?

How about Canadia

	06-09-2003 11:28									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by MrFun Um -- historically, rights have been stronger from higher levels of government. Various times after the Civil War, it was the various individual state governments that set up laws to disfranchise citizens -- not the federal government.

And the Constitution was set up expressly to allow for that, prior to the 14th Amendment, or rather, it's more expansive interpretation.

See the bit about qualification of electors? And I take it you are familiar with Dorr's Rebellion?

Prior to the 14th Amendment, it was standard, and the intent of the Constitution as revealed in the notes and meetings of the state delegations, that the Constitution would ONLY address suffrage for voting for elective Federal offices. The states themselves were free to set whatever more restrictive rules they wanted, or more relaxed rules, for election to state offices. Hence it was a radical notion that any white male of just 21 years of age, regardless of property holdings, could vote for Representatives to the Congress. That is also why the Senate was conceived as the senior body of the Congress, who would consent to treaties and Article II and Article III appointees - because the Senate would consist of more experienced and reasonable members who weren't elected on the basis of their appeal to the common rabble.

	06-09-2003 11:31									#105
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ned Your positon would make sense it the US was like an association you could join or quit. In a contract, one party cannot simply quit. There are good reasons for this.

The Constitution is not a contract. There are no specified remedies for non-performance of the United States, there is no on-going consideration received, and there is no obligation of the state to the United States.

And yes, one party can quit a contract by rescission.

	06-09-2003 11:32									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Odin Don't wine to us when the mexicans come to take thier land back.

We don't want it. You stole it, you keep it.

	06-09-2003 12:18									#107
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat We don't want it. You stole it, you keep it.

Actually, there was a combination of Northern interests and Southern interests in what was Mexico's territory.

Many white Southern planter elites had an interest in expanding territory into the southwest to expand their plantation economy that was based on

.

.

.


slavery.

	06-09-2003 12:29									#108
	Support Apolyton

Well, that was a few of those deep south plantation cracker types. One would have to be denser between the ears than a good ol' Hickory stump, or an Iowan, to figure you'd do much plantation work from West Texas on out.

	06-09-2003 12:31									#109
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Well, that was a few of those deep south plantation cracker types. One would have to be denser between the ears than a good ol' Hickory stump, or an Iowan, to figure you'd do much plantation work from West Texas on out.

DUH!!

Eastern Texas - not western Texas was good land for plantation economic system.

	06-09-2003 12:34									#110
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Well, Texas was already yours, so for the Mexican War land theft to be motivated by slavery, one would have to be assuming there'd be a plantation type economy on out from west Texas.

	06-09-2003 12:40									#111
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat The Constitution is not a contract. There are no specified remedies for non-performance of the United States, there is no on-going consideration received, and there is no obligation of the state to the United States. And yes, one party can quit a contract by rescission.

The US is not like a partnership that can be dissolved by the unilateral action of one or more partners. There are loads of mutual consideration to other states.

Secession would only be legal if all concerned parties consented.

	06-09-2003 13:02									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Ned The US is not like a partnership that can be dissolved by the unilateral action of one or more partners. There are loads of mutual consideration to other states. Secession would only be legal if all concerned parties consented.

That would imply that states yielded sovereignty to other states collectively as a condition of ratification. There's a good reason the Constutition never required that.

And what "mutual consideration" to other states is in the Constitution that is not executory in nature?

And all concerned parties did consent - the seceding states. By what theory would you argue that Michigan, for example, had any standing in an isse as to whether South Carolina was part of the Union or not?

	06-09-2003 16:37									#113
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Both the Dominican Republic and the Cote d'Ivorie practice slavery in agriculture. Rather than take care of their slaves, they simply work them to death and get more (in the case of the DR, they kidnap Haitians).

Then they're not maintaining them are they? Given that the price of a slave in the south was about $300-1000 which is the equivilant of a mercedes today no slave owner could afford to do that.

	06-09-2003 17:09									#114
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by skywalker How about Canadia

How about Alberta? They have some juicy oil. And there is a land border. Would be real easy. Fun to piss the Canucks off too.

	06-09-2003 17:12									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

You have to forgive Che. He lives in Indy-media world. He is a "pop-commie". To wit, the moniker and the tendancy to hang out at the Heartland Cafe (good food). Come the Revolution, we will liquidate him and the other trendy commies. But for now, it is good to have a fellow traveler.

	06-09-2003 18:52									#116
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by TCO How about Alberta? They have some juicy oil. And there is a land border. Would be real easy. Fun to piss the Canucks off too.

Alberta is part of the whole package

	07-09-2003 00:53									#117
	Support Apolyton

Does anyone know whether the issue of secession was discussed by the founding fathers?

	07-09-2003 01:08									#118
	Suffering from ads?

donno. what about the Federalist papers?

	07-09-2003 01:15									#119
	Got spare money?

And what does this passage of the Constitution imply to the argument that States lost no sovereignty and had no allegience to Union? How could a member of a State government not betray a solemn oath to support the Constitution if he or she votes to seceed?

"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, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

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."

	07-09-2003 01:15									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand Bingo. And Texas STILL retains the right.

If it did, it would be an independent country today, seeing as it seceded with the rest of the Confederacy. It was subdued by force and brought back into the Union. Your treaty with the US is null and void.

We own you!

Anyway, by 2050 the state will be majority Hispanic, so you might want to rethink any treasonous thoughts.