Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: HistorianDorisKearnsGoodwad
Your use of the words 'would' and 'therefore' shows the weakness of your ongoing vacuous assertion. You will have to show the wording of the Constitution that says that secession IS subject to Congressional approval.

I didn't say it was subject to Congressional approval. I said that they have to follow Article IV in doing this act.

Congress did not think it did, but you do. So, continuing with this >>> "I never said secession was prohibited, I said the Congress gets to set the rules for proof of secession" <<< is proof of your wish to continue deception.

What deception? Article IV is clear and it says Congress decides how acts are proven.

It seems as if you believe that repetition proves truth, which of course does not.

No, repetition is necessary when the opposition repeats their faulty position though.

No one has asserted that Article 4 controls secessionist movements.

I don't care what anyone else has asserted. The Constitution was to be read by the people and reading it for ourselves, we can see that it clearly says the Congress may prescribe laws for states to prove their acts.

If it did, Buchanan, Black, Seward, and Lincoln would have seized the moment.

Lincoln did, didn't he? Did he ever call the South's secession a legal secession?

627 posted on 03/10/2004 8:33:25 AM PST by #3Fan (Kerry to POW-MIA activists: "You'll wish you'd never been born.". Link on my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson