Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: HandyDandy
There was no "union" in 1776. A "colony" is quite distinct from a State that is one of many. "British Union"? Eh? What is that mate? Methinks it was a Monarchy.

You might look at this.

It explains how the British flag looks like this:

The Cross of Saint Andrew counterchanged with the Cross of Saint Patrick, over all the Cross of Saint George.

You see, it was a "Union."

"I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments.

Thank you for posting that. We now have it in Lincoln's own words that he is reading this interpretation into the constitution. I guess this is the first example of the US constitution being interpreted as a "living constitution" with deep and hidden meanings only perceivable by the enlightened who are just smarter then we mere mortals who see naught but straightforward concepts with little in the way of hidden meaning.

Unfortunately, he is contradicted completely by the Declaration of Independence, which in my opinion is a far higher authority than the US Constitution. The Constitution is merely a rule book, while the Declaration is what created this nation.

It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination.

Histrionics. The 13 slave holding colonies didn't destroy the British Union because they left, and the Southern States would not have destroyed the Union by their leaving either.

If the United States be not a government proper, but an association of States in the nature of contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably unmade by less than all the parties who made it?

The founders answered this question in the affirmative. Yes, people can leave a larger union without the consent of the rest of the Union. See Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

393 posted on 08/17/2015 4:41:31 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

Thanks so much for your link to the “Union of Crowns”. Notice the words, such as, “Crown”, “Kingdom”, “Monarch”, “Sovereign”, “King”, “Queen” (well, you get the idea. I hope). Certainly you are not suggesting that our colonies where a sovereign kingdom and an equal partner of the “Union of Crowns”. You insist on making parallels between our declaring independence from a Monarchy (as colonies) to the Southern States seceding from a Union that was formed by the ideas and thoughts of free men. No comparison there, man. And CERTAINLY no comparison between the “Union of Crowns” and the Union of States!


401 posted on 08/17/2015 5:06:46 PM PDT by HandyDandy (Don't make-up stuff. It just wastes everybody's time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 393 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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