Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Legality of secession: were the states sovereign nations?

Expand Messages
  • brianmccandliss
    This isn t about the causes, it s about the LEGAL ISSUE of the Civil War. There wasn t any warning about that. The causes were obvious-- the legal issues are
    Message 1 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      This isn't about the causes, it's about the LEGAL ISSUE of the Civil
      War. There wasn't any warning about that. The causes were obvious--
      the legal issues are not-- at least not to the point where we can
      say that current policy is legitimate.

      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > I thought discussions of causes were verboten here....
      >
      > --- Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...> wrote:
      >
      > > Agreed.
      > >
      > > James2044 <JWD2044@...> wrote: You might
      > > want to end this quickly.
      > >
      > > A group I'm on had almost the same title as the 1st
      > > post from a new
      > > member. The person who posted this is the group's
      > > newest member.
      > >
      > > This and a couple of other topics caused a meltdown
      > > of almost 1,000
      > > messages in a couple of days.
      > >
      > > James2044
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > _________________________________
      > John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
      > AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
      > "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
      >
      > __________________________________________________
      > Do You Yahoo!?
      > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      > http://mail.yahoo.com
      >
    • Harry Smeltzer
      I m not a moderator, but I play one on TV. This is splitting hairs - and a waste of time, to boot. That s not a judgment of the poster, just of the post. I
      Message 2 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I'm not a moderator, but I play one on TV.

        This is splitting hairs - and a waste of time, to boot.

        That's not a judgment of the poster, just of the post. I think pretty much
        everyone here has their ideas about the legality of secession, and no amount
        of "discussion" is going to change them.

        Harry

        -----Original Message-----
        From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com] On
        Behalf Of brianmccandliss
        Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 8:59 AM
        To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Legality of secession: were the states sovereign
        nations?

        This isn't about the causes, it's about the LEGAL ISSUE of the Civil
        War. There wasn't any warning about that. The causes were obvious--
        the legal issues are not-- at least not to the point where we can
        say that current policy is legitimate.

        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > I thought discussions of causes were verboten here....
        >
        > --- Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...> wrote:
        >
        > > Agreed.
        > >
        > > James2044 <JWD2044@...> wrote: You might
        > > want to end this quickly.
        > >
        > > A group I'm on had almost the same title as the 1st
        > > post from a new
        > > member. The person who posted this is the group's
        > > newest member.
        > >
        > > This and a couple of other topics caused a meltdown
        > > of almost 1,000
        > > messages in a couple of days.
        > >
        > > James2044
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > _________________________________
        > John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
        > AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
        > "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
        >
        > __________________________________________________
        > Do You Yahoo!?
        > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        > http://mail.yahoo.com
        >







        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • brianmccandliss
        ... Which group?
        Message 3 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "James2044" <JWD2044@...> wrote:
          >
          > You might want to end this quickly.
          >
          > A group I'm on had almost the same title as the 1st post from a new
          > member. The person who posted this is the group's newest member.
          >
          > This and a couple of other topics caused a meltdown of almost 1,000
          > messages in a couple of days.
          >
          > James2044
          >

          Which group?
        • Ronald black
          Brian: The question of the right of secession has been debated many times by more learned men than I and never has it been upheld. The method of admission as
          Message 4 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Brian:
            The question of the right of secession has been debated many times by more learned men than I and never has it been upheld.  The method of admission as a member state of the United States is provided but no method of secession is part of the Constitution.  Your citation of Madison in Federalist 39 is only one of the many position papers included in the long discussions held in the constitutional debates and is a position paper at best.  The many rulings of the supreme court has defined, expanded and restricted the powers of the federal government while at the same time defined, expanded and restricted the powers of the states governments.  All of this based on the Constitution.  Which of these rulings do you wish to cite as an authority?  If your assumption is correct, what is your purpose?
             
            Remember the quotation "We must hang together or, surely we will hang separately".  Ben Franklin  (I believe)
             
            Regards
            Ron
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:59 AM
            Subject: [civilwarwest] Legality of secession: were the states sovereign nations?

            This question addresses the legality of secession, under mutual understanding and original legal-intent between the states.

            In Federalist 39, Madison assures the states that the Constitution won't usurp their individual sovereign character, stating that "Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal, and not a national constitution."

            Rather, Amendment 10 states that powers are simply delegated  to the United States  by the states, via the Constitution-- and that all other powers are reserved to the states respectively-- or the people (thereof).

            Likewise, nothing in the Constitution specifically in any way negates this assurance;  Amendment 9 states that the enumeration of certain rights in the Constition, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people; such rights would include this sovereign character, i.e. the simple lack of enumeration of such, cannot in itself be construed to deny it.

            In contrast, Lincoln's claims halting secession under national authority were entirely without merit, historically or legally.

            Rather, it seems that the Union was not a nation of states; rather, the states were sovereign nations unto themselves. As such, they recognized no superior, and had every right to secede, under the terms mutual understanding and agreement regarding the laws between them.

            I have also noticed a conspicuous absence of debate on this issue, leading me to believe that there's some type of "code of silence" on the matter, by those professionals whose interests are conflicted by discussing it; however I'm not afraid of rocking the boat in the name of truth.
            In fact, if such silence exists, we need to investigate and expose it.


            No virus found in this incoming message.
            Checked by AVG Free Edition.
            Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.0/248 - Release Date: 2/1/2006
          • William H Keene
            ... Read the Constitution. By accepoting the constitution, the States clearly recognized that the federal government was superior. ... the ... of ... This
            Message 5 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "brianmccandliss"
              <bmccandliss@...> wrote:
              > ... As such, they recognized
              > no superior,

              Read the Constitution. By accepoting the constitution, the States
              clearly recognized that the federal government was superior.

              > I have also noticed a conspicuous absence of debate on this issue,
              > leading me to believe that there's some type of "code of silence" on
              the
              > matter, by those professionals whose interests are conflicted by
              > discussing it; however I'm not afraid of rocking the boat in the name
              of
              > truth.

              This issue is debated endlessly on other groups. This group is devoted
              ot the study of a specifi theater of the war, so this topic is not
              discussed here.
            • Jfepperson@aol.com
              ... pretty much ... amount ... More to the point, the people in charge of this list have made it clear that they do not want political issues discussed here.
              Message 6 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                > That's not a judgment of the poster, just of the post. I think
                pretty much
                > everyone here has their ideas about the legality of secession, and no
                amount
                > of "discussion" is going to change them.

                More to the point, the people in charge of this list have made it clear
                that they do not want "political" issues discussed here.

                JFE
              • Dick Weeks
                I agree Harry. I really don t want this group to get involved in this type discussion. Let s move on to something else. That s a nice of saying drop the
                Message 7 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  I agree Harry. I really don't want this group to get involved in this type
                  discussion. Let's move on to something else. That's a nice of saying drop
                  the thread.

                  I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
                  Dick (a.k.a. Shotgun)
                  http://www.civilwarhome.com

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Harry Smeltzer" <hjs21@...>
                  To: <civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 9:07 AM
                  Subject: RE: [civilwarwest] Re: Legality of secession: were the states
                  sovereign nations?


                  > I'm not a moderator, but I play one on TV.
                  >
                  > This is splitting hairs - and a waste of time, to boot.
                  >
                  > That's not a judgment of the poster, just of the post. I think pretty
                  > much
                  > everyone here has their ideas about the legality of secession, and no
                  > amount
                  > of "discussion" is going to change them.
                  >
                  > Harry
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com]
                  > On
                  > Behalf Of brianmccandliss
                  > Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 8:59 AM
                  > To: civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: [civilwarwest] Re: Legality of secession: were the states
                  > sovereign
                  > nations?
                  >
                  > This isn't about the causes, it's about the LEGAL ISSUE of the Civil
                  > War. There wasn't any warning about that. The causes were obvious--
                  > the legal issues are not-- at least not to the point where we can
                  > say that current policy is legitimate.
                  >
                  > --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, John Beatty <jdbeatty.geo@...>
                  > wrote:
                  >>
                  >> I thought discussions of causes were verboten here....
                  >>
                  >> --- Bob Taubman <rtaubman@...> wrote:
                  >>
                  >> > Agreed.
                  >> >
                  >> > James2044 <JWD2044@...> wrote: You might
                  >> > want to end this quickly.
                  >> >
                  >> > A group I'm on had almost the same title as the 1st
                  >> > post from a new
                  >> > member. The person who posted this is the group's
                  >> > newest member.
                  >> >
                  >> > This and a couple of other topics caused a meltdown
                  >> > of almost 1,000
                  >> > messages in a couple of days.
                  >> >
                  >> > James2044
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> _________________________________
                  >> John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
                  >> AMCIVWAR.COM/AMCIVWAR.NET
                  >> "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
                  >>
                  >> __________________________________________________
                  >> Do You Yahoo!?
                  >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                  >> http://mail.yahoo.com
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • endeavorgot
                  Perhaps four years of bloody war is one way of ammending the constitution. Bill Bruner
                  Message 8 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Perhaps four years of bloody war is one way of ammending the
                    constitution.
                    Bill Bruner
                  • hank9174
                    ... Don t dislocate a shoulder while patting yourself on the back... HankC
                    Message 9 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, "brianmccandliss"
                      <bmccandliss@...> wrote:
                      >

                      > however I'm not afraid of rocking the boat in the name of
                      > truth.

                      Don't dislocate a shoulder while patting yourself on the back...


                      HankC
                    • Charles
                      ... no ... clear ... I joined this list to learn more about what happned when it happned in the war in the west ,leaving the judgement of why it happned
                      Message 10 of 14 , Feb 2, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In civilwarwest@yahoogroups.com, Jfepperson@... wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > > That's not a judgment of the poster, just of the post. I think
                        > pretty much
                        > > everyone here has their ideas about the legality of secession, and
                        no
                        > amount
                        > > of "discussion" is going to change them.
                        >
                        > More to the point, the people in charge of this list have made it
                        clear
                        > that they do not want "political" issues discussed here.
                        >
                        > JFE
                        >
                        I joined this list to learn more about "what happned" "when it
                        happned " in the war in the west ,leaving the judgement of" why it
                        happned "to someone else.

                        Charles
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.