Actually, Schaff relates in History of the Church that:
And what is more, Rylie relates in History of Protestantism that:
I certainly hope that Servetus did want to overthrow the Genevan constitution since it was corrupt, dictatorial, improperly imposed and the law code supporting it was simply stupid (fines for dancing, for instance).
Blah, blah, blah -- you object to the Genevan Constitution and support Servetus' desire to Overthrow it for no other reason than that you hate Calvinism. That is the truth of the matter.
The bottom line is, the Genevan Constitution was unanimously affirmed by the People, and you can't really call a People "oppressed" who have unanimously affirmed their own Constitution.
Your objections are like unto those of an Old Testament Sodomite who hates the Constitution of Israel because it Anti-Homosexual. Well, the Israelitish Constitution, like that of Geneva, was Unanimously Confirmed (Deuteronomy 27:14-26); so if you don't like it, don't live there.
Servetus was told to stay out of Geneva; chose to trespass there anyway; and was charged, tried, and executed for Crimes against the Genevan Constitution.
Constitutional States have a Right to defend their Constitutions.
CASE CLOSED.
Servetus was accused of 38 charges (all drawn up for the court by Calvin of course). How many were about sedition?
Few if any.
The difficulty is that Servetus disagreed with Calvin, and calvinism was the basis of everything in Calvin's Geneva. Servetus therefore disagreed with the very existence of what Geneva had become.
Sedition? No.