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

To: Mobile Vulgus
They were spot on, in my opinion. Secession was a right and the Federal government, under Lincoln, subverted that right.
3 posted on 02/17/2006 6:07:27 PM PST by T.Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: T.Smith

Yes that's probably true, even though Lincoln was a great president overall. Slavery needed to end no doubt. But the principle is still the same.


4 posted on 02/17/2006 6:13:30 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith
Secession was not a right, a view shared by Andrew Jackson

What are rights are the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, which the South, refusing to let slavery die, denied to 3 million people.

16 posted on 02/18/2006 2:50:59 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (Gal. 4:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith
"Secession was a right and the Federal government, under Lincoln, subverted that right."

Absolutely wrong.

Articles of Confederation:

Article XIII. Every State shall abide by the determination of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions which by this confederation are submitted to them. And the Articles of this Confederation shall be inviolably observed by every State, and the Union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.

"And Whereas it hath pleased the Great Governor of the World to incline the hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress, to approve of, and to authorize us to ratify the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union. Know Ye that we the undersigned delegates, by virtue of the power and authority to us given for that purpose, do by these presents, in the name and in behalf of our respective constituents, fully and entirely ratify and confirm each and every of the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union, and all and singular the matters and things therein contained: And we do further solemnly plight and engage the faith of our respective constituents, that they shall abide by the determinations of the United States in Congress assembled, on all questions, which by the said Confederation are submitted to them. And that the Articles thereof shall be inviolably observed by the States we respectively represent, and that the Union shall be perpetual."

The moment that the Articles of Confederation were signed, secession was no longer a right.

perpetual
A adjective
incessant, perpetual, endless
  occurring so frequently as to seem ceaseless or uninterrupted; "a child's incessant questions"; "your perpetual (or continual) complaints"
ceaseless, constant, incessant, never-ending, perpetual, unceasing, unremitting
  uninterrupted in time and indefinitely long continuing; "the ceaseless thunder of surf"; "in constant pain"; "night and day we live with the incessant noise of the city"; "the never-ending search for happiness"; "the perpetual struggle to maintain standar
ageless, eternal, everlasting, perpetual, unending, unceasing
  continuing forever or indefinitely; "the ageless themes of love and revenge"; "eternal truths"; "life everlasting"; "hell's perpetual fires"; "the unending bliss of heaven"

32 posted on 02/20/2006 11:02:03 AM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith

So you don't understand the Constitution either.


43 posted on 02/21/2006 2:42:48 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith
Secession was a right and the Federal government, under Lincoln, subverted that right.
Uh, I fail to see how Lincoln "subverted" a "right" that was invoked before he became president.
65 posted on 02/21/2006 5:17:10 PM PST by nicollo (All economics are politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith

Secession was not a right. Where does it say in the constitution explicitly that states may leave of their own accord? Unless you subscribe to the notion that there a hidden rights in the consitution such as priviacy, right to sodomy, right to abortion, etc. The planter class wanted to deny slaves god given rights to freedom and sacrificed hundreds of thousands of lives of young southern men to accomplish it.

Put another way, would you allow Hawaii to secede today becuase it claims it has a unique polynesian culture that it must preserve?


158 posted on 02/22/2006 11:51:13 AM PST by voreddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith
I agree with you. Those who think Lincoln was an abolitionist and went to war for the purpose of ending slavery have it wrong. He wanted slavery to be kept out of the new territories but vowed not to force the issue with the states that already had it. He went as far as to say the Fugitive Slave Act would be enforced in the North and that negroes were not equal, should not have suffrage rights, nor serve on juries.

OTOH, he made a lot of conciliatory gestures towards the south as the president-elect that went unreported or were distorted by newspapers in the south. This made a lot of Republicans, who were hard-line abolitionists very angry. The whole thing got out of control during this period with the south voting to secede and forming the Confederacy.

Interestingly, there are parallels to this today. Appeasement, as Lincoln attempted in order to placate the South doesn't work, and the media can play a big part with their distortion of the facts.

247 posted on 02/23/2006 7:24:44 AM PST by Trust but Verify (( ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: T.Smith
Lincoln's job was to abide by the U.S. Constitution ratified in 1788 , not the Articles of Confederation which preceeded it.

If one was to use the Articles of Confederation in the context of Lincoln and secession, it would not be applicable to Confederate states such as Florida and Alabama, since they had no delegates to sign the AofC. Both states ratified the Constitution which was in effect when they entered the United States of America.

313 posted on 02/23/2006 9:28:55 PM PST by stainlessbanner (Downhome Dixie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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