We fought a war to reject the laws of England. I wouldn't use United Kingdom examples to explain United States situations. But if we must, isn't it true that the provinces of Canada broke away as one nation, and the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that unilateral secession in Canada was unconstitutional, but a deliberated secession was possible? Should the United States ratify an amendment laying out a deliberated mechanism for a state to appeal for secession, to be approved or rejected by Congress or the states, but reject the idea of unilateral secession as Canada did?
And this is where I tell you that the US Congress had to threaten Rhode Island to force it to join the Union. It kept rejecting ratification and the Congress finally said they would blockade trade with it if it didn't ratify the Constitution. Do you believe coercing people into a Union is right and proper?
I think this is a gross misstatement of what happened.
First, this is a false statement: "US Congress had to threaten Rhode Island to force it to join the Union". Rhode Island was the first colony to separate from England. I think you are conflating Independence with ratification of the Constitution (which was NOT "joining the Union," but forming "a more perfect Union").
Second, "It kept rejecting ratification" because it was Rhode Island that demanded a guarantee that the Bill of Rights would be included in the Constitution. To paraphrase your words, Do you believe holding out for the Bill of Rights was right and proper?
-PJ
I read a lot of material relating to this subject and I try to condense the summation of all I read into small digestible bites. I have a great memory for a lot of bits and pieces, but there comes a time when I simply cannot tell you everything i've learned off the top of my head.
The bottom line is that the sum total of everything i've so far read on the topic indicates Rhode Island was coerced.
Rhode Island did *NOT* participate in the Constitutional convention. They sent no delegation. The articles of confederation required unanimous consent of all states to make any changes. The framers of the Constitution ignored this requirement.
There are others here who are more familiar with all the details of what happened with Rhode Island. I don't remember exactly who it was, so I pinged a lot of the names I could remember.