Nope, I read just fine. I certainly don't twist the truth to justify the kinds of things you guys do.
This Article IV pursuit of yours is pure hogwash. You say the states needed for Congress to prescribe something which they had already prescribed, stomp your feet and whine because, "secession is different," and then claim that the states need not "petition" Congress.
Stomp and whine, no. My side won, no need to whine. Secession is different than a marraige and has obviously different effects. Simple enough just to allow Congress to set terms of separation.
Petitioning congress for permission to secede and letting congress proscribe the manner in which it is done are one in the same.
No it's not. Like I said, you don't ask a traffic cop for permission to go where you're going but you do things his way when he has jurisdiction over part of your route.
Your attempts to separate them fail in every respect.
Fraid not.
I agree that every American can interpret the Constitution, it's not a difficult document to read or understand. We have ample evidence of activist judges reading into it what is not there, and ignoring what is.
Simple enough just to allow Congress to set terms of separation.
Not that I'm agreeing that Congress even has the delegated power to do such, but Congress has already passed legislation on HOW state acts (legislative), and state judicial acts (court) are proven - by seals, certification &c, and that the effect of such is that those acts are recognized as legal and valid in other jurisdictions.