Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BS69
Ft. Sumter contained foreign soldiers who were "asked" to leave.

Fort Sumter contained U.S. soldiers manning their post. Why should the leave the fort when it was U.S. property?

The south legally left the union, or don't you know your constitution. Amendment 10 - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." It seems to me that modern jurists have ignored this ammendment.

I've read it. I disagree with your contention that unilateral secession was a power reserved to the states.

It was never about slavery. Historians know that, you should too. It was about the constitution and the right of the states.

Of course not. I suppose that's why slavery was by far the single most often mentioned reason for the rebellion.

61 posted on 10/20/2004 2:28:34 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Jefferson Davis - the first 'selected, not elected' president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur

Ft. Sumter was in the CSA not the USA and had no lease agreement or treaty that would allow them to maintain a military presence in the CSA.

The 10th Amendment is the seperation between the federal government and the state government. Most liberals tend to believe, as you, that the states have no individual rights. So you understand, there is NO right in the Constitution that prohibits a state from leaving the USA, therefore, the 10th Amendment takes over and gives the States the authority to make those decisions on their own. This also goes for Abortion, state right to permit/disallow religion in public facilities, and even speed limits. Unfortunately, liberal jurists interpret the Constitution however they wish and continue to "read into" the Constitution rather than take the document literally as the signers intended.

On the war/slavery issue. Prior to Lincoln's election (1857, 1858) he stated he had no intention to emancipate the slaves. His intention with attacking th south was to stop the seperation of the states. Additionally, he illegally arrested Maryland legislators who were on their way to vote on secession and also arrested the governor of Delaware who was ready to approve secession.

The states had a right to leave, and did so. They were brought back in by force and NEVER reapproved for statehood, thereby making them still seperated from the USA.

What good is the Constitution if judges interpret it any way they want? No more prayer in schools (not in the Constitution). No more Pledge of allegiance (not in the Constitution). Federal government determining whether a woman has the right to let a baby live or die (I missed the Constitutional amendment that makes unborn babies property (slaves).

Amen.


73 posted on 10/20/2004 5:59:58 AM PDT by BS69 (A yankee who moved south)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

To: Non-Sequitur

Maybe it is mentioned since those that won the war wrote the history books.....How about that theory?!


79 posted on 10/20/2004 6:19:43 AM PDT by TexConfederate1861 ("Sic Semper Tyrannis" ("Thus be it ever to Tyrants" meaning Lincoln!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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