[sheltonmac]

You always insist on skipping over the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Do you honestly believe that we only have a right to do something if it's specifically mentioned in the Constitution? That document was written for the express purpose of enumerating the powers of the federal government. All else was to be left to the states and the people.

[Illbay]

You don't have the right to say "I don't like the results of that election, I'm pulling out."

Especially when it was your own actions that contributed to your loss in the election.

You don't have the right to insist ONLY on your rights, and ignore your responsibilities.

[SCDogPapa]

"That document was written for the express purpose of enumerating the powers of the federal government."

When our American ancestors consented to calling into existence the federal government in 1787, the means by which they did so was the document known as the Constitution. Contrary to popular opinion, the Constitution was not — and is not — a grant of rights to the citizenry. Instead, the Constitution is a “barbed-wire entanglement” designed to interfere with, restrict, and impede government officials in the exercise of political power.

For example, the Constitution does not grant anyone freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to assemble, or the right to bear arms. In fact, one searches in vain for any language in our Constitution that grants any rights to the people whatsoever.

The Constitution was to control the Federal Government only.

[Non-Sequitur]

You always insist on skipping over the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

Nonsense, I just take them to have a different meaning than you. I believe that there is sufficient evidence that indicates that unilateral secession as practiced by the southern states was not permitted.