RE: Secession, right or wrong?

RE: Secession, right or wrong? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865

Message

Jonathan Palfrey -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (11/30/2006 11:28:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes Since there never was this right, how is it they suddenly "inherently" had this right? Moral rights are independent of law and exist regardless of it. That's one reason why a lot of this legal discussion is rather futile. quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes And I do love how Jonathan keeps trying to twist the Union into some vile evil organization bent on the usurpation of peoples rights and privileges. The USA is not an evil country, as countries go. But the idea that you're entitled to kill people to stop them from leaving your club... That's an evil idea, and I don't understand how anyone in modern times can see it otherwise. quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes And I must take exception to this notion that England just willingly gave away her 'Territories" Ireland fought LONG and hard for freedom, right up to the moment the majority of it was freed. South Africa fought for freedom at the turn of the 20th century and lost and was maintained in the Union until after WW2. India did not just get released. all through the 30's and 40's Indians died because the British had no desire to release India. True, the willingness to let go of territory came to Britain only gradually during the 20th century. It was naturally reluctant to let go of India and Ireland, because India was so huge and Ireland so close. But in the end it all slipped away, and by the time I was born Britain seemed resigned to having an ex-Empire. Though I did spend a couple of years in Nigeria while it was still part of the Empire (it became independent in 1960; I remember there were fireworks). I don't think the Boer War was really a case of South Africa as a whole fighting for freedom: it was more of a civil war in South Africa between Dutch settlers and British settlers. As I understand it; I'm no specialist in South African history.

Twotribes -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (11/30/2006 11:44:21 PM)
Countries are NOT people. You have this annoying habit of ascribing human processes to an entity that is NOT human.

Twotribes -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (11/30/2006 11:48:42 PM)
Ohh and as a matter of a point.... No one actually has an involate right to leave the Country either. People are routinely stopped for numerous reasons and their passports taken away. Your Government does it as well, the only recourse then is to go to Mexico or Canada and try and find some country that doesnt require a passport, or get a fake passport. OR go to an embassy and apply for asylum or citizenship and hope they will takle you. In Europe of course you have numerous countries you can go to without a passport, BUT here they are going to start requiring a passport to enter the US from any foreign entry point, Canada and Mexico included. So much for that INNATE right you have laid claim to.

Twotribes -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (11/30/2006 11:52:13 PM)
I have covered the States AFTER the creation of the Constitution, they were ALL formed from Government land ( Federal Government land) The Country owned the land and allowed people to settle on it, in some cases buying in some cases aquiring through grants of one type or another. In any case every State after the first 13 (except Texas) were owned wholey by the Federal overnment, there is no reason to believe the Government would agree to allow the loss of land that it PAID for. In reply to Greyshaft. EDIT : forgot Texas... In the case of Texas when it was admitted into the Union it owed the US Government a huge pile of cash. A lot was forgiven and portions of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Colorado and a couple other states were ceded, in the sense that Texas dropped all claims to the land in question. So while it was never Federal land it was PAID for by Federal dollars, from citizens , the majority probably dead when Texas tried to leave the Union.

Greyshaft -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 6:06:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes In any case every State after the first 13 (except Texas) were owned wholey by the Federal overnment, there is no reason to believe the Government would agree to allow the loss of land that it PAID for. EDIT : forgot Texas... You also forgot West Virginia... [:D][:D][:D] I'm not a US citizen so I have no axe to grind one way or the other. Makes no nevermind to me whether the Confederacy or the Union won the war. You might have some interesting points to discuss Twotribes, but your total disregard for providing accurate and SPECIFIC references for your claims makes responding to your posts rather futile.

Twotribes -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 6:37:37 AM)
Actually I would have to say West Virginia was a violation of the Constitution. The document is clear, no state can be made from another state without the express permission of that state. As I understand it West Virginia was created without Virginia's permission. Granted they were in rebellion for a time, but the rules is the rules.

Twotribes -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 6:45:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greyshaft quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes In any case every State after the first 13 (except Texas) were owned wholey by the Federal overnment, there is no reason to believe the Government would agree to allow the loss of land that it PAID for. EDIT : forgot Texas... You also forgot West Virginia... [:D][:D][:D] I'm not a US citizen so I have no axe to grind one way or the other. Makes no nevermind to me whether the Confederacy or the Union won the war. You might have some interesting points to discuss Twotribes, but your total disregard for providing accurate and SPECIFIC references for your claims makes responding to your posts rather futile. How much more specific do I need to be? I have sited the portions of the Constitution that apply. OVER and OVER. Granted I havent printed word for word here, but as far as i can tell everyone that can reach this forum is more than capable of goggling to a copy of the Constitution and reading those Articles and sections I listed. If I knew how to paste and copy in this forum I would have done that. But again it isnt neccassary. As far as i can tell the grousing is nothing more than a red herring attempt to distract from my points. It isnt like there are different copies of the Constitution, and almost all are annoitated to indicate amendment changes, so you can hardly claim that was a problem. Anyone that reads , for example, Article I and understands the english language can hardly claim they couldnt find the specific enumerated powers of the Federal Government. Though we did have at least one poster here trying that very tac. Article II and Article III also are very clear as to what powers the Federal Government has and that those powers supercede ANY State law or Constitution. And of Course Article IV makes it abundantly clear that States are junior partners with limited powers.

Jonathan Palfrey -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 8:47:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes Countries are NOT people. You have this annoying habit of ascribing human processes to an entity that is NOT human. Countries are people. They're made up of people. The people who die in wars are not non-human entities. quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes No one actually has an involate right to leave the Country either. People are routinely stopped for numerous reasons and their passports taken away. Yes, governments often violate people's moral rights. I'm aware of it. Just one reason why I'm not fond of governments... quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes In any case every State after the first 13 (except Texas) were owned wholey by the Federal overnment, there is no reason to believe the Government would agree to allow the loss of land that it PAID for. The land has been there for millions of years, no-one created it, so no-one has any moral right to own it. The US government's habit of paying for tracts of land was a quaint old-fashioned idea. I suppose seceding states could offer to pay back the money, if they felt it was appropriate. I'm not sure whether it is or not. Morally, it's an interesting question.

histgamer -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 9:04:37 AM)
You all seem to think the government owns the land. When in fact it was clearly the idea of the framers of our constitution that people owned land their own property and in only specific circumstances was the government allowed to take that away, and if they did they had to compensate you for it. The government does not own the land, however we as citizens allow the government to govern the land with which all of us live in. However should the government lose the support of us the governed they would have no right to use our land for any purpose.

Greyshaft -> RE: Secession, right or wrong? (12/1/2006 10:22:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes quote: ORIGINAL: Greyshaft ... You might have some interesting points to discuss Twotribes, but your total disregard for providing accurate and SPECIFIC references for your claims makes responding to your posts rather futile. How much more specific do I need to be? I have sited the portions of the Constitution that apply. OVER and OVER. Granted I havent printed word for word here,... Well duh!!! that is exactly the point that I (and others) have been telling you. If you want to quote a document to back up your point of view then you ARE expected to print it word for word. The fact that you haven't done this has seriously crippled your credibility. Try submitting an assignment in Law School (or any other discipline really) without citing your references and see how far you get. Simply saying that 'the information is in there somewhere' will not get you a passing grade.

Page: << < prev 8 9 10 11 [12]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.1875