[Nikas777]

I already said, Texas could break apart and form up to 5 states WITHIN the Union but there is no provision in the treaty for leaving the Union it joined.

This thus proves Mr. Lucky's point that no such provision or mechanism.

[stand watie]

actually, it proves exactly NOTHING.

the BOR is written in simple/easy to understand words & it means what it says. (had any of the founders thought that the language of the BOR was NOT plain to any "reasonably literate person" of the 19th century, they would have made the words even simpler.)

fyi, the Constitution of these united States is NOT "a living document", which is subject to "perceived changes in society" by the federal/state/international courts or anyone else. it is what it IS & it means precisely what the "plain text" says.

PLEASE go read the NINTH & TENTH amendments to the BOR & then come back here & either:

a. tell everyone WHERE/WHEN that either the States and/or the people CEDED the POWERS/RIGHT of any free State or group of States to unilaterally change/secede from/reform/abolish the union

OR

b. admit that you are in error.

"the bottom line" is that, regardless of the revisionist/statist LIES that you were propagandized with in "duh fedrul gubmint apruvd public screwls sistim", unilateral secession was in 1861 & NOW is perfectly Constitutional.

free dixie,sw

[Triple]

I take it that you agree that new York and Virginia retain the right to leave the union when they themselves find that certain opressive conditions exist. These measures were part of thief ratifying documents, thanks to none other than Patrick Henry.