What Americans Used To Know About The Declaration Of Independence

“That does change the fact that the Founding Fathers and the early Presidents all considered unilateral secession treason.”

Well, that’s nice, but it really isn’t something that they had any authority to decide. Even if they had written into the Constitution that states couldn’t secede (which they didn’t, so the whole debate is pointless based on the 10th Amendment), the natural rights of men take precedence over even the Constitution.

That’s a valid point, but there was no universal suffrage at that time in any state, and since women are half the population in general, then you could say the same for every state.

Well, there's a difference between not having full agency and chattel bondage. No matter what the feminists would say. You can't really compare the situation of women at the time to that of blacks.

I love the principle of succession, with its acknowledgment that the states loan the federal government its power and can take it back at any time. I just wish it had been tested in a worthy cause, instead of the preservation of slavery.

Make no mistake - the North might have been fighting to preserve the Union rather than banish slavery, but the CSA was fighting specifically to preserve it. Read the states' own declarations at the time. That makes the Confederacy as truly evil a nation as ever existed on God's Earth.

Don't mistake my meaning - I'm not saying all Confederate soldiers were fighting to preserve and defend slavery. Heck, most of the good men who died weren't rich enough to qualify. But the states themselves, and the nation they formed, was absolutely founded on slavery. They were only interested in states' rights to a point, which is why states in the CSA didn't have the right to prohibit or restrict slavery.

Unfortunately, that means the rights of states to secede is now largely invalidated. States can't anymore, as the political question was settled on the battlefield. Which also makes all those headlines above moot, since they all predate the Civil War. States had the right to do so at the time those editorials were written, but lost that right shortly afterward.

I disagree with your premise that states cannot now secede. Who says they can’t? Just because the North won the War of Northern Agression does not mean that that victory was written in stone! If the popular will of the people of a state is to secede, then they can do it. The FedGov will try to force that state back into the union, which is an entirely different scenario, but a state can secede if it wants to. It is a false premise to promote the idea that “we can’t do it now.” We can do whatever the heck we want to and their task is to try to stop us! Reference the Revolutionary War, the Signers of the Declaration of Independence, and King George. Didn’t work out so well for him, did it?

Good post Highball.

One of the pain-points of the continuing discussions on FreeRepublic regarding “states rights” and the supposed right of secession is that when you criticism the confederate secession southerners interpret that as a personal criticism of them. I’m sure that you have no intention of disparaging any fellow FReepers but some will likely get their noses out of joint.

I largely agree with your statements, “Unfortunately, that means the rights of states to secede is now largely invalidated. States can’t anymore, as the political question was settled on the battlefield” but would say that the issue of unilateral secession (as practiced by the confeds) is settled (prohibited) but the larger question of secession is still open. The agreement to dissolve must include all affected parties - not just the separating state(s).

Anything short of that guarantees conflict and confrontation.

Like I said, we can do anything we want. It is up to them to stop us. Granted, the cost to secede might be too high for some, but it is the cost, not the ***ability*** to do so. This “precedent” stuff is way over-rated. It stands only when someone wants it to stand. Look at all the people who are trashing the Constitution. They don’t care a whit about “precedent.”

All I’m saying is that peaceful succession might now be possible if the CSA hadn’t been an outright evil nation. The Confederacy forced the hand to preserve their slavery, and tarnished the concept of succession by association with it.

Now succession doesn’t have the moral high ground it once did, even in the North (see the editorials above), and will always be met with strong military force. That’s a vastly different reality than was once the norm in our nation.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.