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

To: fortheDeclaration
I would bet that you also have flimsy rationalizations as to how states that, according to you, could not secede had to meet requirements to be "re-admitted."

Actually I have a Bachelor's in History, magna cum laude, with a concentration in American History and several theses in Civil War History and a law degree thereafter. I am still waiting for your specific constitutional citation as to prohibition of secession. What this one or that one theorized is not the text of the constitution. What Lincoln or Billy Sherman imagined when committing their crimes is not the test of the constitution. We could also get into the violation of international law at the time which was represented by the "Union's" naval blockade of what it claimed was its own territory when blockades were legal only against foreign powers.

So you don't think that the basis for our nation was success in armed rebellion? Burke was admirable as a friend of the revolution but that did not make it anything other than a revolution. The Brits hanged Nathan Hale quite legally. If Cornwallis had succeeded, they would have hanged Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton (! they should have caught him early on instead of Nathan Hale) and a lot of their friends just as legally. I'll bet that Madison was speaking of the potential Federalist secession of New England represented by the efferts at the Hartford convention.

Oh, and was John Brown a grisly mass murderer and megalomaniac (Potowatomie Creek and Harper's Ferry) or do you justify him because he was allegedly upholding the "rights of man" by machete murders of farmers in Kansas and his planned arming of a slave rebellion in Virginia??? Personally, I think that Bobby Lee and J.E.B. Stuart in charge of U.S. Marines at Harper's Ferry did justice and carried out the rule of law by hanging the SOB. Do you regard him as a martyr?

909 posted on 12/20/2007 4:23:58 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 904 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk
I would bet that you also have flimsy rationalizations as to how states that, according to you, could not secede had to meet requirements to be "re-admitted."

Do you now want to discuss Reconstruction as well?

Actually I have a Bachelor's in History, magna cum laude, with a concentration in American History and several theses in Civil War History and a law degree thereafter. I am still waiting for your specific constitutional citation as to prohibition of secession.

I am waiting to see some statement that specifically allows it.

As for your education credentials, you would never know it by the intellectual quality of your posts.

What this one or that one theorized is not the text of the constitution. What Lincoln or Billy Sherman imagined when committing their crimes is not the test of the constitution. We could also get into the violation of international law at the time which was represented by the "Union's" naval blockade of what it claimed was its own territory when blockades were legal only against foreign powers.

Well, Madison didn't think secession was legal.

Jackson didn't.

Robert E. Lee didn't.

And if it were legal then, it should be still legal now, but it isn't.

The Constitution was to form a more perfect union between the people, not one that could be broken apart at whim.

So you don't think that the basis for our nation was success in armed rebellion? Burke was admirable as a friend of the revolution but that did not make it anything other than a revolution. The Brits hanged Nathan Hale quite legally. If Cornwallis had succeeded, they would have hanged Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton (! they should have caught him early on instead of Nathan Hale) and a lot of their friends just as legally. I'll bet that Madison was speaking of the potential Federalist secession of New England represented by the efferts at the Hartford convention.

The American Revolution was a revolution for the rule of law, not against it.

As the 'Sons of Liberty' correctly understood.

No, Madison was speaking of the writings coming out of South Carolina.

But what difference would that make anyway?

New England had no more right to secede then did the South.

That little attempt destroyed the Federalist Party, since they became known as the 'Party of treason', until the Democrats took over that honor after the Civil War.

Oh, and was John Brown a grisly mass murderer and megalomaniac (Potowatomie Creek and Harper's Ferry) or do you justify him because he was allegedly upholding the "rights of man" by machete murders of farmers in Kansas and his planned arming of a slave rebellion in Virginia??? Personally, I think that Bobby Lee and J.E.B. Stuart in charge of U.S. Marines at Harper's Ferry did justice and carried out the rule of law by hanging the SOB. Do you regard him as a martyr?

No, John Brown got what he deserved, but he did nothing that the Confederates did on a much grander scale,being responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of men by their treason.

911 posted on 12/20/2007 4:40:23 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (Neocons-the intellectual blood brothers of the Left-Yaron Brook)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 909 | 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