“But can you tell us if you’d approve of secession if a group of states (perhaps right in your very territory) finds that the other, more populous states are making it impossible for them function as the majority of their citizens desire.”
“You can secede for any reason you want, or for no reason at all if that’s your choice. The why is unimportant to me and is only of concern to those wanting to leave. My position is and always has been that if it is clear that the majority of the people of a state or states wishes to leave the Union and makes this desire clear to Congress, then it is Congress’ duty to negotiate a fair and equitable settlement of all potential issues of disagreement and then vote to allow them to leave. If the state chooses armed conflict instead of negotiated and peaceful separation then all bets are off. They fight and win or they fight and lose, the ultimate outcome is in their hands. But in the end there is one, and only one peaceful way to separate and that through negotiation and agreement on both sides of the issue.”
Herein lies the rub. “..it is the Congress’ duty to negotiate a fair and equitable settlement....and then vote to allow them to leave.”
Do you seriously believe that this Congress would allow Texas or any other state to peaceably leave? No, they are too much into control and power. They couldn’t care less about the Constitution, States Rights or anything else that might interfere with their power and control.
What option then would the seceding state or states have left other than unilateral secession?
Why not if the alternative is a state where the overwhelming majority of the people don't want to be there and the likelyhood of violence? If 75% of Texas said that they wanted to leave then I'd be the first one in Congress to offer to chair the negotiating committee. Keeping Texas, or anyone else, under those kinds of circumstances makes no sense at all.