[Non-Sequitur]

Is there any secessionist movement in the history of the planet that you approve of?

No, but there were several rebellions that I think were justified.

[puroresu]

So what you are basically saying is that there is no way to ever escape an oppressive regime, other than by overthrowing the government (i.e., a rebellion). But a rebellion is just as illegal as secession. And since you oppose secession I suppose you think Tibet and Taiwan should belong to China in perpetuity and that Russia has a claim to Georgia, and for that matter that Britain has a claim to the United States.

Why, if a government is deemed oppressive, is it okay to violate the law and remove it and not okay to violate the law and leave it? What exactly should Kansas do when all those illegal aliens get amnesty and leftist Democrats are locked into power in perpetuity? And they then trash what's left of the Constitution by packing the court with activist “living constitution” judges who rewrite the whole thing from the bench?

It seems to me that the conservative pockets of the nation have three choices. Submit and say thanks to Big Brother. Rebel and overthrow the government. Or secede. The latter two are both illegal by your logic, so why would one be okay and the other not? Not to mention that the reason for secession would be that our government is no longer abiding by the law or the Constitution in the first place.

It's absurd for you to nitpick about the legality or constitutionality of secession when the government we'd be seceding from has long since abandoned both the rule of law and the Constitution, when it's locked in power by giving amnesty to people who illegally entered our territory. Talk about unilateral disarmament. I suppose you'd say we should abide by treaties with foreign nations even if those nations ignore them.