Liberty News Forum - Political News Forum

Shooterman

LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker

Offline

2009 LNF libertarian of
the year.

Posts: 23,205

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #10 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 5:41pm

Quote:

The states are autonomous they are not sovereign. Only fifteen states have any claim on having been sovereign states the other 35 do not. The oritginal 13 were, before they ratified our Constitution, sovereign states. By ratifying our Constitution they surrendered their sovereignty to our Federal government. The other states that were at one time sovereign states are Texas and Hawaii. As the Republic of Texas it was a sovereign state for until it joined the Union. Hawaii when it was annexed by the US to become a US territory was a kingdom. The other 35 were never sovereign states. All of them were first United States territories with their boundries created by Congress. After a period of being a US territory they all requested permission from Congress to join the Union.

All interesting but totally superfluous to whether a state is sovereign.

Quote:

Is the Union perpetual? No, nothing is perpetual. However there is nothing in our Constitution that gives states the right to secede from the Union. Our Founding Fathers believed from their experience of living under the Articles of Confederation that unless there was central government, with limited but broader powers than under the A of C, the nation they had fought a war to create would not long exist. The external and internal threats our new country faced convinced them of the need for a strong central government. Unfortunately like all governments the desire for power has caused ours to grow far beyond what our Constitution says our government can do. Now we are faced with problem of how to reduce the power our Federal government has usurped. How we can do that within the guidelines of our Constitution is the challenge we as a nation must find a solution to.

If the states, acting in convention assembled, acceded to the Constitution, a Compact, ( or contract ) it was understood at the time they could secede. You may not like the concept, but true it was. Secession was being promoted by Massachusetts in 1813 over the of the War of 1812, as it was interfering with it's trade. It even so far as possibly being willing to commit Treason by joining with England in the war of 1812. They wanted no part in paying for the war or in letting Louisiana become part of the country. It was settled of course by Jackson's victory at New Orleans and became a moot point.

Secession and the thought of it was not new and everyone accepted the fact.

Back to top

We have computers and Boeing 747s because the North won the Civil War- Thomas Paine December 2010&&&&&&&&

We should not fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously. Shooterman 1935-

&&&&The United States is entirely [354 U.S. 1, 6] a creature of the Constitution.

IP Logged

robth

Hardhat
LNF Bunker

Offline

The Sleep of Reason Begets
Liberalism

Posts: 11,740
New Mexico
Gender: male

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #11 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 6:27pm

I suppose if enough states ratified a constitutional amendment disolving the union, then it wouldn't be perpetual.

However as a practical matter your question is moot. Any state trying to seceed would not be allowed to do so, and a revolution is pretty unlikely as well.

But your question makes for some interesting discussion.

Back to top

&&

IP Logged

Shooterman

LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker

Offline

2009 LNF libertarian of
the year.

Posts: 23,205

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #12 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 6:58pm

robth wrote on Apr 13^th, 2009 at 6:27pm:

I suppose if enough states ratified a constitutional amendment disolving the union, then it wouldn't be perpetual.

However as a practical matter your question is moot. Any state trying to seceed would not be allowed to do so, and a revolution is pretty unlikely as well.

But your question makes for some interesting discussion.

I do understand, Robth that the War of Rebellion ended the concept by force of arms. That, however, doesn't make the concept any less of a good idea. In fact, Virginia ratified with the idea being understood, as written in the Ratifying Document, it could leave if the staying became odious to them.

Back to top

We have computers and Boeing 747s because the North won the Civil War- Thomas Paine December 2010&&&&&&&&

We should not fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously. Shooterman 1935-

&&&&The United States is entirely [354 U.S. 1, 6] a creature of the Constitution.

IP Logged

Senator_Hatrack

Ex Member

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #13 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 7:00pm

Shooterman wrote on Apr 13^th, 2009 at 5:41pm:

All interesting but totally superfluous to whether a state is sovereign.

An explanation of why the states of the Union are not sovereign is superfluous only if you continue to mistakenly believe that states were sovereign.

Quote:

If the states, acting in convention assembled, acceded to the Constitution, a Compact, ( or contract ) it was understood at the time they could secede. You may not like the concept, but true it was. Secession was being promoted by Massachusetts in 1813 over the of the War of 1812, as it was interfering with it's trade. It even so far as possibly being willing to commit Treason by joining with England in the war of 1812. They wanted no part in paying for the war or in letting Louisiana become part of the country. It was settled of course by Jackson's victory at New Orleans and became a moot point. Secession and the thought of it was not new and everyone accepted the fact.

In so doing they were in violation of our Constitution and by selling supplies to our enemy they were committing treason. See Article 1 Section 10 clause 3.
Quote:

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

This planned attempt at secession was illegal and hypocritical. Massachusetts and other New England states supported the war until it began to hurt their economy. When that happened they engaged in the treasonous act of selling supplies to our enemy. If you think hypocrites like the New England states were in their desire for secession are worthy of respect than it is not surprising that secession is looked down upon. Then the southern secession for the support of slavery has tarnished the idea beyond redemption.

Back to top

IP Logged

Shooterman

LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker

Offline

2009 LNF libertarian of
the year.

Posts: 23,205

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #14 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 7:39pm

Quote:

An explanation of why the states of the Union are not sovereign is superfluous only if you continue to mistakenly believe that states were sovereign.

In so doing they were in violation of our Constitution and by selling supplies to our enemy they were committing treason. See Article 1 Section 10 clause 3.
This planned attempt at secession was illegal and hypocritical. Massachusetts and other New England states supported the war until it began to hurt their economy. When that happened they engaged in the treasonous act of selling supplies to our enemy. If you think hypocrites like the New England states were in their desire for secession are worthy of respect than it is not surprising that secession is looked down upon. Then the southern secession for the support of slavery has tarnished the idea beyond redemption.

What ever are you on about, SH. Actually Massachusetts threatened secession about four times. I'm not even sure they even got around to selling supplies to Britain, but it was certainly entertained in the Hartford Convention of 1814.

Why is it so hard, my friend to understand the states, in assigning a small part of their sovereignty, ( those eighteen duties assigned to the Federal government ) still maintained the rest of their sovereignty? Why did three states reserve the right to leave the Union at their discretion? Is the Constitution not a Compact between the states?

BTW, a new book I started today, says in the preface, the South would actually have been safer for Slavery, if they had stayed in the Union. Lincoln was willing to have a amendment ( irrevocable ) guaranteeing slavery if the South stayed. I've just cracked it, so do not know all the particulars as of yet.

Back to top

We have computers and Boeing 747s because the North won the Civil War- Thomas Paine December 2010&&&&&&&&

We should not fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously. Shooterman 1935-

&&&&The United States is entirely [354 U.S. 1, 6] a creature of the Constitution.

IP Logged

LadyBug Ex Member	Re: Is The Union Perpetual? Reply #15 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 7:41pm I answered "maybe" because you don't have a spot for "I hope so."
Back to top	IP Logged

Senator_Hatrack

Ex Member

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #16 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 8:48pm

Shooterman wrote on Apr 13^th, 2009 at 7:39pm:

What ever are you on about, SH. Actually Massachusetts threatened secession about four times. I'm not even sure they even got around to selling supplies to Britain, but it was certainly entertained in the Hartford Convention of 1814.

When Massachusetts and other New England states did at the Hartford Convention joining together with the other states was in violation of our Constitution. They should have seceded first and then had the convention. For if secession was legal then those states would not have violated our Constitution. They did sell supplies to our enemy.
http://www.scv674.org/SH-4.htm
Quote:

HARTFORD CONVENTION: The New England region, once again, was the subject of secession when in 1814 all of the New England states, who had earlier demanded that the United States enter the War of 1812, became dissatisfied with the war when it cut into their potential for making a profit. New England states held close mercantile ties to Great Britain. Both Massachusetts and Connecticut refused to contribute militia to the federal government. In spite of an embargo enacted by Congress in December 1813, New Englanders continued to sell supplies to British troops in Canada and to British vessels offshore. This demand for wartime provisions benefited New England businessmen and their states, as did the enhanced market for domestic manufactures.

Trading with the enemy is, in my understanding, treason.
Quote:

Why is it so hard, my friend to understand the states, in assigning a small part of their sovereignty, ( those eighteen duties assigned to the Federal government ) still maintained the rest of their sovereignty? Why did three states reserve the right to leave the Union at their discretion? Is the Constitution not a Compact between the states?

Sovereignty is like pregnancy. Either you are or you aren't. That three states out of thirteen reserved the right to secede does not under our system of majority rule make secession legal. Had seven or eight out of thirteen done so you would be right that there is a right to secede. Yes the Constitution is a compact between the states but there is not an escape clause, secession, in the compact.

Quote:

BTW, a new book I started today, says in the preface, the South would actually have been safer for Slavery, if they had stayed in the Union. Lincoln was willing to have a amendment ( irrevocable ) guaranteeing slavery if the South stayed. I've just cracked it, so do not know all the particulars as of yet.

That sounds like an interesting book. What is its title and where is it available? On Tuesday Barnes & Noble is shipping me the book Is Secession Treason by Mr. Bledsoe. I look forward to reading it. Is it a long book? If it is around a couple of hundred pages I could read it in two or three days. Lincoln was not against slavery as much as he was for the preservation of the Union. Had the South I believe that slavery would have died out because it was a dying economic system. The Industrial Revolution would have made slavery obsolete.

Back to top

IP Logged

Shooterman

LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker

Offline

2009 LNF libertarian of
the year.

Posts: 23,205

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #17 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 10:15pm

Quote:

When Massachusetts and other New England states did at the Hartford Convention joining together with the other states was in violation of our Constitution. They should have seceded first and then had the convention. For if secession was legal then those states would not have violated our Constitution. They did sell supplies to our enemy.
http://www.scv674.org/SH-4.htm
Trading with the enemy is, in my understanding, treason.

Granted, but charges were never laid at their feet.

Quote:

Sovereignty is like pregnancy. Either you are or you aren't.

Poor analogy, SH. Very poor analogy.

Quote:

That three states out of thirteen reserved the right to secede does not under our system of majority rule make secession legal. Had seven or eight out of thirteen done so you would be right that there is a right to secede. Yes the Constitution is a compact between the states but there is not an escape clause, secession, in the compact.

If three states are admitted with those provisions, all have them by inference.

Quote:

That sounds like an interesting book. What is its title and where is it available? On Tuesday Barnes & Noble is shipping me the book Is Secession Treason by Mr. Bledsoe. I look forward to reading it. Is it a long book? If it is around a couple of hundred pages I could read it in two or three days. Lincoln was not against slavery as much as he was for the preservation of the Union. Had the South I believe that slavery would have died out because it was a dying economic system. The Industrial Revolution would have made slavery obsolete.

'When In The Course of Human Events, Arguing the Case for Southern Secession' Charles Adams

Rowland & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Back to top

We have computers and Boeing 747s because the North won the Civil War- Thomas Paine December 2010&&&&&&&&

We should not fall into the trap of taking ourselves too seriously. Shooterman 1935-

&&&&The United States is entirely [354 U.S. 1, 6] a creature of the Constitution.

IP Logged

Senator_Hatrack

Ex Member

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #18 - Apr 13^th, 2009 at 10:37pm

Shooterman wrote on Apr 13^th, 2009 at 10:15pm:

Granted, but charges were never laid at their feet.

Nor were charges ever laid at the feet of "Hanoi" Jane Fonda but that doesn't mean she was didn't commit treason.

Quote:

Poor analogy, SH. Very poor analogy.

Poor it may be but it got the point across.

Quote:

If three states are admitted with those provisions, all have them by inference.

Now it is your turn to engage in speculation.

Quote:

'When In The Course of Human Events, Arguing the Case for Southern Secession' Charles Adams

Rowland & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Would he be a descendent of either Pres. John or John Quincy Adams? Your book report is due in one week.
Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

FreedomLover

Hardhat
Conservative Caucus
LNF Bunker

Offline

RIP Roger... you'll be
missed.

Posts: 24,993
The sane part of California
Gender: male

Re: Is The Union Perpetual?
Reply #19 - Apr 30^th, 2009 at 10:23pm

Shooterman wrote on Apr 13^th, 2009 at 9:10am:

Yet some argue that because a state doesn't have all sovereignty, it has none.

A state can't be partly sovereign.... that's like partly being a virgin.

And I vote yes..... in that by the intent of the Founders the Union is meant to be perpetual but the reality is nothing will last forever.

Back to top

The DLC:&&&& &&&&&&

IP Logged