No it wouldn’t. The provision of any given agreement may be found nonbinding if it is shown to be unconscionable. First semester contract law. Being forced to live under tyranny is the epitome of unconscionable contract. Therefore, it is inherently unenforceable, as a matter of law, the military calculus not withstanding.
Furthermore, freedom of association implies the right to quit any voluntarily entered association. You are right that consequences might follow, such as unsettled debt, and they must be attended, but the right of association (or lack of it) remains undiminished, as to our hapless country club member.
Extrapolating that right to the states is not that difficult. BTW, I didn’t see your post dealing with the rather persuasive argument that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. I am interested in your opinion.
And who gets to decide if the provisions are unconscionable? If I decide they are, what's to stop the other side from saying they are not and insisting the agreement remain in force? What makes me right and them wrong?
Being forced to live under tyranny is the epitome of unconscionable contract. Therefore, it is inherently unenforceable, as a matter of law, the military calculus not withstanding.
One man's tyranny is another man's government. You would have a hard time proving tyranny when you have all the representation that the Constituiton reserves for you and as much a say in the goverment as the other states.
Furthermore, freedom of association implies the right to quit any voluntarily entered association.
Then can the states combine and expel a single state from the Union against its will? In the name of 'freedom of association'?
BTW, I didn’t see your post dealing with the rather persuasive argument that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. I am interested in your opinion.
It is not a suicide pact. It is also not a club for one state to beat the remaining states with just because they want out. The Constitution protects all parties - those wanting to leave and those wanting to stay. Secession with the agreement of both sides is the only way that the interests of both sides can be protected.