[An.American.Expatriate]

As Madison stated except for some intolerable grievance they can't secede.

Thank you for conceeding that secession is legal under the constitution.

Why is it that you and you alone get to set the terms of this debate?

I dont. Instead, I asked you politly way back at the beginning if we could limit the discussion and you agreed. If you woluld like to discuss the causes and justifications, I sure others are willing to do so. I have no desire to debate the civil war again and again on these boards - it has been done repeatedly and nothing good every comes of it ...

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Thank you for conceeding that secession is legal under the constitution."

I never said it wasn't. You obviously have a comprehension problem. What I said for many posts is that if both parties agreed (Union and state governments) then a state could secede from the Union. When only one party agrees, they are in breach of the compact (something Madison also talked about). This is actually not secession, but rebellion. If the Southern states wanted to leave the union, they should have done it legally, politically through the law and the existing contract they had with the federal government (the Constitution). Not by force of arms. When you start a war, you shouldn't complain about the consequences.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

I do find it amusing that you are so caught up with a government entities rights (a states right to secede from the union) but apparently see no problem with people’s rights (the only ones who actually have rights) to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (you know, that whole slavery thing) that is clearly defined in the Declaration of Independence. I guess in your view the state (government entity) had a greater right to secede than slaves (i.e. people) had to be free from tyranny.