Replies

Apples and oranges! You're trying to apply contemporary standards to issues that were well settled in the early 1800's, a time when each state was acknowledged by our own Federal government as "sovereign" powers. Each state had it's own Constitution, legislature, judicial and executive branches. The Federal government's "power" at that time was limited to the coining of money, the establishment of tariffs, the protection of member states against foreign invasion. There was no "law" that prohibited any state from secession! If you look at the 10th amendment you'll note that the Framers gave the states much more power and autonomy than they did a central government. The 13th amendment didn't take effect until 1865. The 14th amendment wasn't ratified until 1868. So, at the time the South seceeded, there was no inherent "right" of the Northern people to "invade" the South to "force" them to remain in the Union, which of course it did. When the 13 Colonies decided to "secede" from the empire of Great Britain, there was no question that they had the "right" to do so, at least in their opinion. When the Southern states took the same action it was for exactly the same reason. Each of the 13 Colonies were created by Great Britain, not by any act of the Colonists. Each had its own governor, appointed by the King. When the Colonists decided to "secede" from Great Britain the Colonists confiscated property, that up until that time, was the property of Great Britain. The idea that all power or sovereignty must be in the hands of one agent(The King), and not divided among many is a throwback to the erroneous notion of the "divine right of Kings". The issue of slavery was a by product of the Civil War. Lincoln, by his own admission, would have kept slavery if in doing so he could preserve the Union. Not only had Southerners elected their own legislators in each colony by 1700, but also by early 1776 ALL royal governors had been removed from office and replaced by governors chosen by the people or their representatives. These actions all took place before the Declaration of Independence was signed. The following is a list of the royal governors and the dates of their removal by the people of the South: 1. Virginia-Gov. John Dunmore -June 1775; 2. North Carolina Gov.J. Martin August 1775; 3. South Carolina Gov. W. Campbell, early 1776 and 4. Gov. James Wright, January 1776. The theory that the Declaration of Independence formed the "Union" and that this document called the states into being cannot be justified by historical facts. You can read it till the cows come but you won't find any such phrase in it.
Nowhere in the Constitution is there a statement about "perpetuity". Too many people simply don't do their homework when it comes to issues that are controversial and even more refuse to change their position when the facts refute their arguement. I guess the old axiom that "history is what the winner says it is" still holds true.

Each and every day a very powerful central government eats away at the rights of it's citizens. The Constitution is no longer a viable or even a reliable protection against government. We have abdicated our individual rights by permitting judicial activism, by allowing the Courts to restructure our basic protections against an obtrusive and out of control government. Just look around you and try the tell me that you have them same degree of protection FROM your government that you had a year ago, because that's what the Constitution is all about. it wasn't designed to protect government, it was designed to protect you against government. I assume you're interested in the subject of your "rights", and that being the case I'd recommend that you pick up a copy of a book titled "The South Was Right" by James and Walter Kennedy, Pelican Press 4th Edition. Sit down and read facts as opposed to formulating your opinions on the assumptions of others or teachers who only repeat what they've been told, doing no independent research on their own.. You'll at least have the benefit of looking at the issues from the other side.

Apples and oranges!

Who owned Fort Sumter and the land it was on?

You're trying to apply contemporary standards to issues that were well settled in the early 1800's, a time when each state was acknowledged by our own Federal government as "sovereign" powers.

Andrew Jackson would quite disagree with you.

If you look at the 10th amendment you'll note that the Framers gave the states much more power and autonomy than they did a central government.

They also gave that power to "the people."

"The people" in your community secede from the United States, and declare your property to be part of their new nation. They give you every opportunity to leave. You refuse. Then they start shooting at your house.