Posted on 02/17/2010 3:43:05 PM PST by Constitutionalist Conservative
“My belief is that the process for leaving should be the same as the process for joining....”
YOUR BELIEF!!! It’s your belief that states can only secede by complying with the four elements YOU have established. Your belief is one thing, the law (and its application) is another thing entirely. The simple fact and truth is that in 1860-61 secession was not precluded under the Constitution. Over the preceding years rational men had argued both for and against the concept, but their arguments were exercies in theory and opinion, and not holdings of law. For every scholar or pundit who argued for the right of secession onbe could trot out one who opposed it. That made for lively debate, but not application of law.
The whole Civil War was about political power, money, and destiny.
Political power...something that the South was losing rapidly, and the abolitionist North gaining by leaps and bounds.
Money...what the South stood to lose without their "peculiar institution".
Destiny...one people, one nation. The United States are vs. The United States is.
Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine; In memoria æterna erit justus, ab auditione mala non timebit.
Beauseant!
You, sir, are a decendant of scum, by your own admission.
Hardly. Step one is common sense; you should have a majority of your people supporting your leaving shouldn't you? Steps two and three come from James Madison. Step four about waving bye-bye was license on my part.
The simple fact and truth is that in 1860-61 secession was not precluded under the Constitution.
It turns out unilateral secession was, as the court ruled in 1869. And BTW, Chief Justice Chase also endorsed steps two and three in his decision.
That made for lively debate, but not application of law.
Which is why it took the 1869 court decision to set it to rest.
Pot? Meet kettle. Kettle, this is pot.
Read what I said; they frequently are. Furman v Georgia did not strike down future death penalties, it invalidated the sentence of every person on death row.
That means that if something is legal in 1860 the Constitution does not allow a ruling in 1868 to go back and charge the actor after the fact .
Say what?
"Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union." - Chief Justice Chase.
i.e., ex post facto application.
You are incorrect on that.
That’s what the LAW says.
That's what your opinion of what the law says.
I think the reason you antagonize so many people on FR...is that you cherry-pick other’s comments, take them to a place they never were, and then toss in an aside that, while on the surface may seem relevant, but in fact is not. It is, well...a non-sequitur.
The reason why I antagonize you and your friends is that I won't sit back and put up with the nonsense. If I think you're wrong then I say so, and that antagonizes y'all because you can't come up with facts to back your claims. Uncomfortable, I know.
...(besides you pathological hatred of anything and everything Southern, which is, in all candor, alarming...
Another vintage Southron pot-meet-kettle moment considering it can be no more alarming than the pathological hatred of anything and everything Yankee demonstrated by you and your buddies.
I was laughing then. I'm laughing at you now.
I didn't make the claim that you said I made.
You didn’t “try”, you just “did”.
Your ancestors would rather coerce poor Irish immigrants ( Fresh of the Boat ) To fight - Than fight themselves! Cowards. They would rather burn a man's home - Than fight the man who owns it. Not all Unionist - believed as your Kin.
“I take a just pride as an American citizen, a descendant on both sides of my parentage of English stock, who came to this country about 1640, that the Southern army, composed almost entirely of Americans, were able, under the ablest American chieftains, to defeat so often the overwhelming hosts of the North, which were composed largely of foreigners to our soil; in fact, the majority were mercenaries whom large bounties induced to enlist, while the stay-at-home patriots, whose money bought them, body and boots, ‘to go off and get killed, instead of their own precious selves, said let the war go on.’”
“Their artillery horses are poor, starved frames of beasts, tied to their carriages and caissons with odds and ends of rope and strips of rawhide; their supply and ammunition trains look like a congregation of all the crippled California emigrant trains that ever escaped off the desert out of the clutches of the rampaging Comanche Indians; the men are ill-dressed, ill-equipped and ill-provided—a set of ragamuffins that a man would be ashamed to be seen among even when he is a prisoner and can't help it; and yet they have beaten us fairly, beaten us all to pieces, beaten us so easily that we are objects of contempt even to their commonest private soldiers, with no shirts to hang out the holes of their pantaloons, and cartridge boxes tied around their waists with strands of rope.”
Marquis of Lothian
“Let us however suppose the Southern Secession to have been altogether illegal and uncalled for, or rather let us turn away our eyes from the question altogether, and suppose that the causes of the struggle are veiled in obscurity. Can we find anything in the circumstances of the war itself which may induce us to take one side rather than the other? Those circumstances have been very remarkable. This contest has been signalized by the exhibition of some of the best and some of the worst qualities that war has ever brought out. It has produced a recklessness of human life; a contempt of principles, a disregard of engagements; a wasteful expenditure almost unprecedented; a widely extended corruption among the classes who have any connection with the government or the war; an enormous debt, so enormous as to point to almost certain repudiation; the headlong adoption of the most lawless measures; the public faith scandalously violated both towards friends and enemies; the liberty of the citizen at the mercy of arbitrary power; the liberty of the press abolished: the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act; illegal imprisonments; midnight arrests; punishments inflicted without trial; the courts of law controlled by satellites of government; elections carried on under military supervision; a ruffianism both of word and action eating deep into the country; contractors and stock jobbers suddenly amassing enormous fortunes out of the public misery, and ostentatiously parading their ill-gotten wealth in the most vulgar display of luxury; the most brutal inhumanity in the conduct of the war itself; outrages upon the defenceless, upon women, children and prisoners; plunder, rapine, devastation, murder,—all the old horrors of barbarous warfare, which Europe is beginning to be ashamed of, and new refinements of cruelty thereto added, by way of illustrating the advance of knowledge. It has also produced qualities and phenomena the opposite of these. Ardour and devotedness of patriotism which might, alone be enough to make us proud of the century to which we belong; a unanimity such as has probably never been witnessed before; a wisdom in legislation; a stainless good faith under extremely difficult circumstances; a clear appreciation of danger, coupled with a determination to face it to the uttermost; a resolute abnegation of power in favor of leaders in whom those who selected them could trust; with an equally resolute determination to reserve the liberty of criticism, and not to allow those trusted leaders to go one inch beyond their legal powers: a heroism in the field and behind the defences of besieged cities, which can match anything that history has to show; a wonderful helpfulness in supplying needs and creating fresh resources; a chivalrous and romantic daring, which recalls the middle ages: a most scrupulous regard for the rights of hostile property; a tender consideration for the vanquished and the weak; a determination not to be provoked into retaliation by the most brutal injuries, which makes one wonder, recollecting what those injuries have been, whether in their place, one would have done as they have done. * * * And the remarkable circumstance is * * * that all the good qualities have been on the one side, and all the bad ones on the other.”
Shhhh, he's on a roll. I want to see what he comes up with next.
My direct ancestors arrived on these shores in the 1630s from England and did their parts in founding this once great nation. I hate no one and simply seek the truth of what actually happened in that era which BTW is NOT contained in public school history books because they were written by people exactly like you or who were under duress (had a gun pointed at their heads) when they wrote. You can call that hatred all you want but it will never-the-less remain a lie!
Your victory long ago - Will be short lived.
Are you two Cowards - going to boast - Claiming another man's victory for your own? Or are Y'all going to fight yourselves this time?
Yellow-belly
noun
An ignoble, uncourageous person: coward, craven, dastard, funk, poltroon. Slang chicken. See fear/courage.
It does appear you are unable to keep the terms of the treaty.
And you sir are not worthy of me wasting another second of my time on so buzz off!
Mine arrived from eastern Europe early in the 20th Century. So what?
You can call that hatred all you want but it will never-the-less remain a lie!
And unless you can come up with some quotes supporting your slander about my 'pathological hatred of anything and everything Southern' then I would say my description of you is just as accurate as your description of me. What you call 'pathological hatred of anything and everything Southern' is merely a refusal to swallow your Southron bullshit and recognize your rebellion for what it was and your leaders for what they were. Nothing more and nothing less. That's what annoys you so much, the fact that there are people out there that you can't snow.
You are nothing if not predictable. We have nothing to fear because you and your ilk will wear yourselves out thumping your chests and flapping your gums and won't have the energy to actually do all the crap you brag that you're going to do...someday...maybe...when you get around to it. Idabilly? Idabooby is more like it.
You may imagine Lincoln a god but most others do not and especially those who have done even the most perfunctory research on the matter.
Not to worry, there’s only one God ~ Lincoln listened to him. Time you started.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.