If your state secedes:
FEMA won't be there to help YOU pick up the pieces.
http://www.alipac.us/f19/fema-give-m...ictims-267707/
Printable View
If your state secedes:
FEMA won't be there to help YOU pick up the pieces.
http://www.alipac.us/f19/fema-give-m...ictims-267707/
Texas Secession Petition Movement Fuels Plans To Secede
By: Rob Adams | 11/26/2012 03:44 PM ET
Follow: Lone Star, Secede, Texas, Texas Secession Fever, United States, White House
Texas is experiencing a change, providing fuel to its session fever movement, after collecting the needed 25,000 signatures to petition advocating for the Lone Star to secede from the United States.
http://cdn.newsoxy.com/2012/11/texas...3956849110.jpg It is the first such movement for the state since it joined the union in 1845. The basis is the disagreement with the federal government over its fiscal and security policies, including TSA searches at airports.
Many people look at this movement and wonder, with the difficulty of fiscally managing a nation and its diverse factions of peoples, why anybody would want to set up their own country?
However, the U.S.-Mexico border region, as important as it is economically, is often ignored by White House,, and Mexico City. At a more local level, the border region is often ignored by the powers that be in the state capitals of border states. The El Paso and Southern New Mexico region can be used as an example.
In 1850, El Pasoans opted to become part of Texas, rejecting its historical connection to New Mexico. Referred to as “El Paso del Norte,” the Pass to the North, in colonial times, this city was a major gateway to New Mexico on the Camino Real, the royal highway that stretched from Mexico City to Santa Fe. The pass to the north in this case was the pass to Santa Fe.
The U.S. and Mexico come together physically via the nearly 2,000-mile border between the nations. The region plays a natural role of industrial production and the logistics required to send products to target markets on either side of the border. The logistical superiority of two economic powerhouses being located next to each other, coupled with the economical labor force, make the border region an important place where companies can achieve the advantages necessary to compete in the global market.
The border’s popularity as an industrial and logistical base will continue in the future as industrial and supply chains tighten.
With the global economic crises continuing, wouldn’t it be in the best interest for the people of Texas to stay linked with the United States?
http://www.newsoxy.com/politics/sece...xas-98647.html
Texas secession petition response: White House deadline nears
texas secession
November 26, 2012
By: Devonia Smith
10 photos
View the full slideshow »
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...y%20Images.jpg
Related topics
texas secession
Barack Obama
petitions
Civil War
gun rights
As of Monday and at the time of this publishing, 117,355 Texans think it is time to "divvy up the china and draft a property settlement," ending what many Texans feel has been a tumultuous marriage between the Lone Star State and the United States of America. Any official response to petitions filed on the White House’s “We the People” website are to be within 30 days of initiation.
The deadline of December 9 is near.
In Texas, one Billy Bob Anonymous, drawled, "If all the liberals who want to change our country into Europe were ants, I'd grind 'em under the heel of my boot. They aren't, and I can't; so secession is one of the options open to stop the wimpy p---ants and their president from ever messing with Texas again."
View slideshow:Texas size reasons why Texans think Texas is awesome: Hint, it's not just that Texas girls are prettier even though there is that...
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...892393eb8f.jpg Texas celebrates 165th year of Independence
Photo credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/def...8782342516.jpg Video debt limit primer: Hysterically not-funny spoof about raising the debt limit. Anyone no matter who they voted for should be able to understand it.
Many Texans do feel the government under the Obama administration is guilty of "messing with Texas." 17 lawsuits currently pending against the federal government. The biggest legal battle mounted by Texas, on a variety of issues, including health care reform and environmental standards. Texas argues the 10th Amendment grants state governments more autonomy than many of the laws passed by the federal government allow.
Though only .46 percent of the population of Texas has added their John Henry to the White House citizen petition requesting peaceful secession, following the reelection of Barack Obama to a second term as president, emotionally, it may be more. According to the New York Times, Romney won Texas by about 1.3 million votes.
Currently, all 50 states have active secession petitions on the White House’s “We the People” website. Of that 50, Texas, South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Florida, Missouri, Tennessee, North Carolina, Alabama, Oklahoma and Ohio have the required 25,000 signatures needed to prompt a possible official response to their petitions, within 30 days of initiation. Signatures have been very quietly added as media reports get louder and louder in their support or mockery of these citizen's notion of secession. A citizen petition should not be confused with an official state or Texas Ordinance of Secession.
From the FACs of a Houston site selling bumper stickers promoting Texas secession, in answer to the question, "Didn’t the outcome of the Civil War prove that secession is not an option for any state," the response was:
"No. It only proved that, when allowed to act outside his lawfully limited authority, a U.S. president is capable of unleashing horrendous violence against the lives, liberty, and property of those whom he pretends to serve. The Confederate States (including Texas) withdrew from the Union lawfully, civilly, and peacefully, after enduring several years of excessive and inequitable federal tariffs (taxes) heavily prejudiced against Southern commerce.The question most asked is whether Texas could survive as a republic, apart from but next to the United States. Many think that economically Texas could succeed quite easily.
Refusing to recognize the Confederate secession, Lincoln called it a "rebellion" and a "threat" to "the government" (without ever explaining exactly how "the government" was "threatened" by a lawful, civil, and peaceful secession) and acted outside the lawfully defined scope of either the office of president or the U.S. government in general, to coerce the South back into subjugation to Northern control.
The South's rejoining the Union at the point of a bayonet in the late 1860s didn't prove secession is "not an option" or unlawful. It only affirmed that violent coercion can be used, even by governments (if unrestrained), to rob men of their very lives, liberty, and property."
“Our economy is about 30 percent larger than that of Australia,” boasts Larry Scott Kilgore, a perennial Republican candidate who hails from Arlington, a Dallas suburb.
Kilgore has plans to legally change the Scott in his name to "SECEED," in capital letters.
“Australia can survive on their own, and I don’t think we’ll have any problem at all surviving on our own in Texas," added Kilgore.
Some of the organizations supporting Texas secession, many formed prior to Obama's first election, are:
- TexasSecession (www.TexasSecession.com) 817-453-5744
- Texas Nationalist Movement (www.texasnationalist.com) is dedicated to keeping Texas free of abuse by the federal government, in existence since 1994
- Republic of Texas (www.texasrepublic.info) documents the annexation of Texas as a U.S. state as having been a fraud in the first place, and reclaims the Republic's sovereignty. Contact:trep777@dctexas.net
- Free Texas Constitution (freetexasconstitution.wordpress.com) aims to provide an outline for concepts to be incorporated in the new Constitution for the independent Republic of Texas.
Whether or not secession is successful, it's true that Texans are loading up on guns, according to a recent report of the Ft. Worth Star Telegram. Though many say their reason to stockpile weapons has nothing to do with politics, other Texans point to Obama's anti-gun policies as reason to buy now. One weapon manufacturer notes national firearm sales have grown ten percent each year since Obama was first elected.
Finally, as also noted in the Star, "The point is, we have a federal government that's designed to give unhappy people a chance to come back and change things in the next election." As Billy Bob Anonymous noted, many Texans believe there is more than one way to get rid of "p---ants," who "mess with Texas."
Texas secession petition response: White House deadline nears - National Political Transcripts | Examiner.com
What would happen if Texas actually seceded?
By The Week's Editorial Staff | The Week – 12 hrs ago
Secession fever has struck much of red America after President Obama's re-election. And that's got a lot of people asking "what if...?""Talk of secession is in the air," says Brett Arends at MarketWatch. At least a small number of people in each of the 50 states have filed petitions on the White House website "We The People" asking that their state be allowed to leave the Union.
Under rules laid out by President Obama, any petition that gets 25,000 "signatures" in 30 days earns an official response: At least seven states have more than 30,000 signatures, and the Texas petition had more than 117,000 as of Nov. 26. All of this secession fever "comes 150 years after the Civil War, and just in time for Steve Spielberg's biopic of Abraham Lincoln, the man whom we have to thank — if that’s the word I want — for the continued forcible marriage of the once-independent states." Of course, nobody really expects any state to openly revolt and agitate for independence, but what would happen if they did?
Here's what you should know:
First off: Do states have the right to secede?
No. Like "nullification" — the idea that states can unilaterally ignore a federal law they don't like — secession "is one of those extra-legal concepts that was hotly debated during the decades leading up to the Civil War," says Richard Dunham in the Houston Chronicle. Nullification and secession threats have popped up in the 150 year since, but the question was mostly settled at the Battle of Appomattox Court House. "The bottom line is that any state — or confederation of states — can illegally secede from the Union. But the result, as we discovered in 1861, is Civil War."
SEE ALSO: Out-of-this world storage space
Are there any exceptions?
No — although lots of Texans believe their state has a special "opt-out" clause (31 percent, according to a 2009 Rasmussen poll). Part of that may be due to Gov. Rick Perry (R), who told a crowd that year that when the former Republic of Texas "came in the Union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave, if we decided to do that." But he was wrong, says Jeff Turrentine at Slate. "Texas' so-called 'right' to secede is no more than a politically emboldening myth, the boastful residue of the decade it spent as a sovereign nation before joining America." Still, the Lone Star State does have "an unusual ace up its sleeve" — its annexation papers do allow Texas to unilaterally split in to as many as five states. Some Texas Republicans posit that faced with the threat of eight new Republicans tilting the balance of the Senate, Washington would let the Texas offshoots leave without a fight.
What would happen if the feds let states go peacefully?
First of all, "it would be excellent financial news for those of us left behind if Obama were to grant a number of the rebel states their wish," says Dana Milbank at The Washington Post. That's because most states threatening to secede are part of the old Confederacy, and "low tax" southern red states typically get "far more from the federal government in expenditures than they pay in taxes." Each California and New Jersey taxpayer, for example, pays thousands each year to subsidize residents of Louisiana and Alabama — the lone exception is Texas, which, thanks to oil revenue, comes out about even, tax-wise.
SEE ALSO: 21st century copycat
And what about residents of unshackled red states?
If you're in a state intent on bolting the Union, there is good tax news, says MarketWatch's Arends: "You will be liberated from the sheer living hell of the federal tax code." Of course, you'll also "get fewer government services." Also, your newly independent nation "will go into recession, and fast."
The feds would take back their highway, airport, and university research funding, and maybe even demand a refund, says the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in an editorial. Obama would close down or repossess federal courthouses, prisons, national parks, and military bases that pump tens of billions each into local economies.
Plus, Texas and other newly minted nations would have to pay for their own militaries, says Jack Simmons at the UT-Arlington Shorthorn. "We would also need some form of health care, some sort of disaster relief, a postal service, welfare, social security, FDA, CIA, FBI — the list goes on," totaling well over a trillion dollars. "And that's just start-up costs."
So why is secession so popular?
It's not, really. Even in Texas, the hotbed of the secession movement, support for breaking free is limited to "a loud but small minority," says the Houston Chronicle's Dunham. Rasmussen clocked it at 18 percent. In other words, "more Texans believe in UFOs than in secession." Mostly, secession talk is just a silly way to register disappointment in the election results, says Glenn Harlan Reynolds at USA Today. Remember "in 2004, when disappointed Democrats were talking about secession, and circulating maps of America divided into 'The United States of Canada' and 'Jesusland'"? But there are serious reasons, too: Some states "feel that the central government doesn't respect them, forces them to live under laws they find repugnant, and takes their money away to pay off its own supporters."
The way to fix that is giving states more power — in other words, returning to the federalism the U.S. was founded under. "It's a nice plan. Beats secession."
http://news.yahoo.com/happen-texas-actually-seceded-114000495.html
bttt
DIVORCE AGREEMENT Dear liberals, Progressives, Socialists, Marxists, CommunistsThe person who wrote this is a college student. Perhaps there is hope for us after all.
DIVORCE AGREEMENT
THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL DONE - HARD TO BELIEVE IT WAS WRITTEN BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!!! WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM.
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al: We have stuck together since the late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is a our separation agreement:
--Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
--We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.
--You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
--Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
--We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel.
--You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them.
--We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street.
--You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens.
--We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks.
--We'll keep Bill O?Reilly, and Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood .
--You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
--You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.
--We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
--You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.
--We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt and Leaf you can find.
--You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors.
--We'll keep "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "The National Anthem."
--I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" or "We Are the World".
--We'll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.
--Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Barbara Streisand, & ( Hanoi ) Jane Fonda with you.
P.S.S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.
Forward This Every Time You Get It ! Let's Keep This Going, Maybe Some Of It Will Start Sinking In!!
Nullification, Secession, Civil War?
Posted by Rev. Larry Wallenmeyer Admin II on December 4, 2012 at 3:29pm in Constitutional Issues
View Discussions
http://www.westernjournalism.com/wp-...emocrat-SC.jpg
Headlines Since November 6th-
Secession Movement Explodes: 675,000 signatures, 50-state participation
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Less than a week after a New Orleans suburbanite petitioned the White House to allow Louisiana to secede from the United States, petitions from seven states have collected enough signatures to trigger a promised review from the Obama administration.
By 6:00 a.m. EST Wednesday, more than 675,000 digital signatures appeared on 69 separate secession petitions covering all 50 states, according to a Daily Caller analysis of requests lodged with the White House’s “We the People” online petition system.
Source-
http://patriotupdate.com/32733/secession-movement-explodes-675000-s...
===========================================
White House ‘secede’ petitions reach 675,000 signatures, 50-state participation
2:01 AM 11/14/2012
...The Texas petition leads all others by a wide margin. Shortly before 9:00 a.m. EST Wednesday, it had attracted 94,700 signatures. But a spokesperson for Gov. Rick Perry said Tuesday afternoon that he does not support the idea of his state striking out on its own.
“Gov. Perry believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it. But he also shares the frustrations many Americans have with our federal government,” according to a statement from the governor’s office.
A backlash Monday night saw requests filed with the White House to strip citizenship rights from Americans who signed petitions to help states secede. (RELATED: Anti-secession forces fight back with White House deportation petit...)
And in a similar nose-thumbing aimed at Texas’ conservative majority, progressives from the liberal state capital of Austin responded Monday with a petition to secede from their state if Texas as a whole should decide to leave the Union.
Late Tuesday a second group of Texans, this one from Houston, lodged their own White House petition. Secession-minded Texans, they wrote, “are mentally deficient and [we] do not want them representing us. We would like more education in our state to eradicate their disease.”...
...Fourteen states are represented by at least two competing petitions. The extra efforts from two states — Missouri and South Carolina — would add enough petitions to warrant reviews by the Obama administration if they were combined into petitions launched earlier.
Other states with multiple efforts include Alaska, California, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.
The White House provides a 30-day window of time for petitions to reach 25,000 signatures.
Source-
http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/14/white-house-secede-petitions-reac...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
November 14, 2012 by Tim Brown
Secession Movement Sweeps All 50 States
Since my first report of Texas and Louisiana residents petitioning the feder..., the numbers have grown, until now all 50 states have petitions going and many of them have already succeeded in making their goal and toppin..., which triggers an official response from the White House.
While some commenters have claimed that is was only a 100,000 or so people that were pushing this, the figures are pushing upwards of 1 million and that is just since Saturday. The petitions are gaining national attention and I’ve received many emails in support of the effort and some that are against it...
...But here’s the good news. These petitions to peacefully withdraw so a common unity around the principles that the Founders united around. Remember, the Revolutionary War was not wanted by the majority of the people.
...State Contacts-
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampsire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Source-
http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/secession-movement-sweeps-all-50-...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The Secessionist Movement And Our Ideological Divide
November 18, 2012 By Richard Larsen
...Interestingly, however, Thomas Jefferson seemed to think contrarily. In a letter penned in 1825, Jefferson said, that states “should separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left, are the dissolution of our Union with them, or submission to a government without limitation of powers. Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation.”
The head of the Texas Nationalist Movement, Daniel Miller, said this past week, “The fact of the matter is, that there cannot be a union between those that esteem the principles of Karl Marx over the principles of Thomas Jefferson. Here in Texas, we esteem those principles of Thomas Jefferson – that all political power’s inherent in the people.”...
...Aside from illustrating a few of the points of disaffection of our divided America, this exercise, especially if carried to logical conclusions, provides an insight into what the state of the nation would degenerate to if unbridled liberalism had its way. Succinctly, their agenda is untenable without the morality and financial resources of the taxpayers, producers, employers, laborers, and middle class of the right. Eventually the blue states would be at the doorstep of the red states pleading for a bailout and a rescue plan.
Clearly, there will be no secessionist states, or division of resources like a divorce settlement. But the depth and breadth of our cultural divide is clearly bifurcated. I guess we’ll just have to cope like embattled spouses in an unhappy marriage, and try to get along as best we can. This may require some compromises along the way, but that means giving a little on both sides, not just a caving in by the red side.
Source-
http://www.westernjournalism.com/the-secessionist-movement-and-our-...
------------------------------------------------
[NOTE: I am 100% OPPOSED to any and all compromise. Conservatives have had enough Compromise since 1912! STICK TO CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES! DO NOT BACK DOWN ONE IOTA!]
---------------------------------------------
Other Head-Lines-
http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/petitions-to-white-house-grant-tx...
and,
http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/11/texas-secession-petition-tops-goa...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +
[NOTE: The articles from Freedom Outpost reflect a decided Confederate/Democrat bias.]
=======
Civil War?
http://jonathanturley.files.wordpres...ldiers2eee.jpg While I do not support secession, I DO understand the frustration, and I DO support the principles for such, whereas I did NOT when The Democrat South seceded to protect the State "Right" of Slavery.
But whether I support the principles this time or not, I do not promote Secession simply because The Left will NOT let us "just go"...hence why I am also against a Civil War.
So Civil War is not a "solution".
BUT what can "We The People" DO?!
Nullification.
Sources-
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-...
and,
Watkins: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions
YES.
I DO 100% support, promote and call for ALL States to exercise their 9th, 10th and 11th Amendment Rights and nullify, make null and void ALL non-Constitutional "laws".
So you can use those State links above and instead of petitioning for secession- PETITION FOR NULLIFICATION...begin with Obama-Care and go from there.
BE CONSERVATIVE.
WIN.
Nullification, Secession, Civil War? - Patriot Action Network
Population, United States
311,591,917 - Jul 2011
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
bad analogy... less than 2 percent fought the British and what is going on is in the beggining stages... either way, I dont care; but it would be nice to stop being robbed blind by the Democrats and Republicans
Secession 101
Posted by Jim Delaney on December 4, 2012 at 5:03pm in General, Town Hall
View Discussions
Some Advice to "Secession Petitioners"
Historically, short of revolution or rebellion, secession is the ultimate practical check on centralization.
http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=I.48493...h=138&c=7&rs=1 No branch of the federal government is empowered to decide upon the merits of a State's inherent right to secede. By its very nature, secession is an anti-federal act not requiring federal sanction.
Petitioning the federal government for permission to secede is self-contradictory and has no basis in English common law or American constitutional history. Secession/rescission/withdrawal is a unilateral action and is not dependent upon mutual agreement between the parties to that contract.
When one enters into a contract and the other party violates that contract, does one request permission of the offending party to withdraw from that contract already violated? Of course not. All compacts are subject to the equitable remedy of rescission in the event of a breach of contract. It's really common sense, basic contract law. It's that straightforward.
At its inception, the US of A was a voluntary compact (contract) of sovereign States, each retaining the inherent authority to rescind its contractual relationship with the federal government, the other party to that contract, should the latter violate the terms of that contract/compact. That contractual relationship hasn't changed, though the misnamed "civil war" may have led us to believe otherwise. (By the way, "civil war" means that two or more factions are militarily struggling over control of the central government; however, in America's so-called "civil war", the South was defending its sovereign territory, not entertaining the capture and control of the central government in DC.)
Force of arms alone by a revisionist, self-contradictory, union-at-any-price nationalist, that being our heretofore venerated Abe Lincoln, cannot--and did not--invalidate a State's inherent right to secede, or to otherwise rescind its ratificaton of this contract, no more than the federal government can legally or constitutionally annul the People's right to rebel in the face of tyranny.
Note: if secession were treasonous, which some maintained it was, why then were not southern leaders dragged into court following the North's successful invasion of the Confederate States of America? Easy. Because the North didn't want to lose in court what they thought they had won on the battlefield.
Perpetual union at any price was never contemplated or embraced by the Founders. Rebellion, secession, nullification, civil disobedience remain essential elements of America's republican fabric, and the threat or application of force on the part of the federal government cannot eradicate those foundational, inherent and unalienable rights of a free people.
When ratifying the Constitution, and only to the extent that it delegated certain of its sovereign powers to the federal government, not once did any State surrender its sovereignty. All powers voluntarily granted by the States to the federal government were very limited and very specific. All other powers not delegated remained with the States.
The 10th Amendment enshrined that principle in the Constitution and, in so doing, reasserted the foundational principle that the federal government cannot unilaterally redefine the limits of its powers. To join the union, the States were not compelled to surrender anything, much less their sovereignty.
And remember, we not only seceded from England, but also, one by one, from the Articles of Confederation (which was said to be "perpetual") in order to form the current union of States, a union which was initially comprised of but 9 States, the remaining 3 sovereign States freely opting to remain outside the union until well after the Constitution's adoption. This "MORE perfect union"--MORE perfect, NOT perfect--was not intended or expected to exist in perpetuity, but, like the Articles of Confederation, only until such time that the compact outlived its usefulness. Our Founders, studious historians, were not stupid men and well understood the corruptibility of men and all that man may devise. While our Founders hoped the union would be strong, free and productive, they did not view secession and dissolution as ill-conceived, treasonous or unanticipated. We've just been brainwashed into believing that secession and dissolution are vile, wrong, corrupt and treasonous. Not so at all. If that were true, then our Founders were charlatans and short-sighted fools. They weren't.
All that said, as a first step I recommend that States opt for nullification, the "rightful remedy" as Jefferson described it, to resist unconstitutional acts by the Supreme Court, the Congress, the Chief Executive and their myriad bureaucracies which now comprise the unofficial fourth branch of government. And to render nullification more efficacious, States should enact punitive laws to prohibit the enforcement of those federal acts nullified by the State. This is called "interposition", or a State's insinuating itself between intrusive federal authority and the citizens of the State. Interposition would actually require the arrest, trial and imprisonment of any State OR federal agent who attempts to enforce a nullified federal act. Of course, implicit in nullification is the threat of secession should the invasive federal government fail to retreat to contractual parameters. But, again, secession is not by its nature treasonous or unavoidably violent. Not at all.
Finally, while I sincerely appreciate the wave of secessionist sentiment sweeping the country, secession, a serious constitutional matter, requires a majority of a State's residents to support the act. Anything less than a majority constitutes a protest and nothing more. And even with a majority expressing its support for secession, the people's State representatives must be won over as well, this if the label of "insurrection" is to be avoided and Art I Sec 8 Para 15 be invoked. Note: per Art IV Sec 4 of the Constitution, "on application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened)", the feds can be asked to intervene, whether that intervention is morally repugnant or not. Secession is a political act, not merely a feel-good act. Thus, on the subject of secession, both the people of a State and their duly elected State representatives must be one.
So, to the near one million well-intentioned petitioners around the country, this: without a majority within a State as well as State legislative support, secession is an impossibility. Great PR--maybe--but nothing more.
"The source of Lincoln's power was his willingness to exercise power not grounded in the orginal Constitution but in in his creative abilities to undermine the Constitution while rhetorically defending it." Donald Livingston, "Rethinking the American Union..."
"The secession of a state from the Union depends on the will of the people of such state. The people alone, as we have already seen, hold the power to alter their constitution." William Rawles (1825)
Secession 101 - Patriot Action Network
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PJYsxODqLk
Rebel Yell: 700,000 Americans sign secession petitions to White House - YouTube
Published on Dec 9, 2012
Hundreds of thousands of Americans say they want to break away from Washington.
Residents across the land, have signed internet petitions, saying they don't want to be part of the United States anymore. Marina Portnaya has the story.
RT LIVE On air
Subscribe to RT! http://www.youtube.com/subscription_...er=RussiaToday
Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/RTnews
Follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/RT_com
Follow us on Google+ http://plus.google.com/+RT
RT (Russia Today) is a global news network broadcasting from Moscow and Washington studios. RT is the first news channel to break the 500 million YouTube views benchmark.
Category News & Politics
License Standard YouTube License
Do States Have a Right to Secede?
by Robert Natelson on December 14, 2012
The news that thousands of people have signed a petition for their own states to secede from the union has raised this issue once again.
We’ll leave to another time the suspicion-inducing question of why so much attention is focused on the most extreme remedy for federal overreaching when the Framers’ own perfectly constitutional remedy remains neglected (the state application and convention process of Article V). In this post, let’s address only whether the Constitution—as understood by the people who adopted it—actually authorizes secession. More information on this topic appears in my book, The Original Constitution.
The text of the document does not address the issue directly. But from all appearances it seems to contemplate a perpetual union. The drafters’ views on the subject were well captured by John Dickinson, writing during the federal convention: “We are not forming plans for a day month year or age, but for eternity.”
Moreover, the Constitution is not written in the form of an interstate compact. Its structure is based on the standard form of a royal charter by which the sovereign granted power to others. In the case of the Constitution, the sovereign is “We the People,” recited in the same place that the king’s name would have been located before Independence. Recall that the Declaration of Independence already had defined Americans as “one people.”
Opponents of the Constitution fully understood the significance of this structure, and it was one reason for their opposition. For example, at the Virginia ratifying convention anti-federalist Patrick Henry reacted in anger: “Who authorized [the Framers] to speak the language of, We, the people, instead of, We, the states?”
What were the views of other Founders? A popular book on the Constitution by an academic author claims that the advocates of the Constitution insisted during the ratification debates that the states were individual parties to a federal compact. The book also claims that three states—Virginia, Maryland, and Rhode Island—reserved in their actions of ratification their right to secede from the union.
Do you believe in the right of states to secede? Sign the petition.
But those assertions are simply false.
Here’s why:
* During the lead-up to ratification, the Federalists (the Constitution’s advocates) generally spoke or wrote of the document as a power grant directly from the people. Thus, James Madison asserted in Federalist No. 46: “The federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes.” In other words, the federal government is the agent of the people, not of the states.
* Opponents of the Constitution acknowledged this. William Grayson, a leading anti-federalist speaking at the Virginia ratifying convention, summarized the pro-Constitution position as holding that the Constitution “was a compact between the people themselves”—not among the states.
* The claim that Virginia, Maryland, or Rhode Island reserved in their ratification instruments a right of secession is also false. Maryland said nothing on the subject. And although states’ rights feeling was particularly strong in Virginia and Rhode Island, neither of those states asserted a right of secession either.
* On the contrary, the Virginia ratification instrument acknowledged expressly that “the powers granted under the Constitution” were “derived from the people of the United States.” And the Rhode Island instrument stated that “That all power is naturally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.”
* Both Virginia and Rhode Island acknowledged the general right of revolution against an oppressive government, but both asserted that right for the people, not for the states. A proposed statement of the general right of revolution was rejected by the Maryland convention. You can read the ratification acts of Maryland, Virginia, and Rhode Island yourself by clicking on the state names in this sentence.
Why is there such confusion on the issue? One reason is that some in the Founding Generation did speak of the proposed Constitution as if it were an interstate compact. But this is best understood as a slip of the tongue or of the pen, since the Founders were used to thinking of the central government in terms of the Articles of Confederation, which was such a compact. (Note, however, that even the Articles were by their terms “perpetual;” there was no reserved right of secession.)
Additional confusion arises because many the Founders used the word “compact” to describe the Constitution. However, during the Founding Era, the term “compact” in this context usually referred to a general social compact among the people themselves. (On the use of the word, see Donald S. Lutz, The Origins of American Constitutionalism, pp. 16-22). When the Founders referred to the Constitution as a compact, they generally meant the word in this sense. An example is the William Grayson quote above.
Finally, as I have pointed out before, many common myths about the Founding actually were invented or gained force decades after the Constitution was adopted, and were promulgated by those who stood to gain from them. The supposed right of secession is one example.
None of this excuses the outrageous disregard of constitutional limits shown in recent years by the federal government. Nor should it discourage people from opposing federal overreaching.
But the first step to enforcing the Constitution is to understand what it does—and does not—mean.
Tagged as: secession
http://www.conservativeactionalerts....son1-80x80.jpg About Robert Natelson
Rob Natelson is one of America’s best-known constitutional scholars and a former a tenured law professor at the University of Montana. Natelson is a Senior Fellow at both the Independence Institute and Arizona’s Goldwater Institute.
Do States Have a Right to Secede?
No "State" has seceded.
No "State government" has even attempted to secede.
Secession petitions grow, but without legal weight - San Antonio ...
www.mysanantonio.com/.../Secession-petitions-grow-but-without-leg...CachedNov 14, 2012 – Crockett said that, while creating online secession petitions is an “amusing and conspicuous way to vent,” it does little to advance the political ...
IS SECESSION POSSIBLE? « The Burning Platform
www.theburningplatform.com/?p=43883Cached
Nov 12, 2012 – It appears that this is a clear-cut case of secession petition fraud. ...
U.S. Secession Petitions: Not Legal for States like Texas to Break ...
ideas.time.com/.../can-texas-really-secede-from-the-union-not-legally...Cached
Nov 19, 2012 – ... of Americans from all 50 states have signed petitions to secede. ...
The thing is they are working on it, a while back no State or Local Government would have even dreamed of doing it before.....Just goes to show where there is smoke there is fire...I am not sure I agree with the secession idea because I think it could mean divide and conquer for us all. I feel were much stronger as a nation standing together and secede from the government manipulators,judges and etc by withholding taxes, and other things they take from us against our will we need to force them to abide by the Constitution.
There certainly is no place in the Constitution that permits people to force their state to secede from the union.
So to attempt to do so would be unconstitutional.
The U.S. Constitution was written in the wake of the failure of the Articles of Confederation
Would States Secede to Protect Their Citizens?
http://cfp.canadafreepress.com/caruba010913.jpg Alan Caruba (Bio and Archives) Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Many, if not most, Americans are unaware that the nation is composed of separate republics with their own constitutions. They are, of course, the individual states.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved respectively, or to the people.” – Tenth Amendment
By tying compliance with federal laws and regulation to receiving funds, the states have been coerced to accept programs that limit freedoms enumerated in the Constitution and the passage of Obamacare is but one example. Some twenty states have refused to set up the mandated insurance exchanges. Obamacare grants the government complete control over the provision of medical care that every American has formerly received from the free market health system that it destroyed. It gives the federal government control over our lives in terms of who lives or dies.
As noted on the website of the Tenth Amendment Center: “The Founding Fathers has good reason to pen the Tenth Amendment.”
“The issue of power – and especially the great potential for a power struggle between the federal and the state governments – was extremely important to the America’s founders. They deeply distrusted government power, and their goal was to prevent the growth of the type of government that the British has exercised over the colonies.”Their worst fears are coming true as the nation heads into 2013. In just four years, the Obama administration, through its profligate borrowing and spending, has brought the nation to the brink of financial collapse and, as we have seen, the refusal of the President to negotiate anything than the current Band-Aid to avoid the “fiscal cliff” for another two months, has brought the nation to a point where the collapse of the U.S. dollar is not just imminent, but likely.
“Adoption of the Constitution of 1787 was opposed by a number of well-known patriots including Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and others. They passionately argued that the Constitution would eventually lead to a strong, centralized state power which would destroy the individual liberty of the People. Many in this movement were given the poorly-named tag ‘Anti-Federalists.’”
“The Tenth Amendment was added to the Constitution of 1787 largely because of the intellectual influence and personal persistence of the Anti-Federalists and their allies.”
When that occurs the individual states may elect to secede in order to avoid having the federal government nationalize their National Guard units or take control of their state police to enforce whatever measures it might take to control the population. Individual state law enforcement authorities in cities and towns would need similar protection. Reportedly, massive amounts of funding have been directed to them to ensure their cooperation.
It would be a means to protect their citizens insofar as state constitutions grant the same rights as found in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. It would not surprise me to see Texas lead the way. Others would follow.
You know things are bad when historians like Arthur Herman, writing on the January 3 Fox News, says that “Washington’s Republicans and Democrats alike have become the toll collectors on the road to serfdom.”
Citing recent riots in Argentina, Herman said that “Argentina reveals who really suffers when those who create a nation’s wealth get mugged by those who spend it—as just happened this week in Washington.”
If the private sector manages to rally this year, it may buy some time before the midterm elections in 2014.
A letter to the editor in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune summed up the problem neatly. “Let’s look at what we have learned from this election: Twenty-one of 22 incumbent senators were re-elected, and 353 of 373 incumbent members of the House were re-elected. The American people have re-elected 94 percent of the incumbents who were running for re-election to an institution that has an approval rating of about 9 percent.
This indicates, as an electorate, we are a nation of idiots. We’re now stuck with the useless, dysfunctional government that we deserve.”
The U.S. Constitution was written in the wake of the failure of the Articles of Confederation, the first attempt to unite the states for the common good of the growing nation. It is the product of some of the finest minds, the most dedicated advocates of liberty, to gather in one place at one time. It is the oldest, living Constitution in the world. It was adopted on September 17, 1787 and ratified in June of 1788.
On December 17, 1791, the first ten amendments—the Bill of Rights—were ratified. It is a list of immunities from interference by the federal government and the fears of the Founders are now being borne out by a government that is too large, borrows and spends too much money, and has departments such as the Homeland Security that threaten the rights of free speech, travel, and other freedoms. Every U.S. citizen is now subject to government surveillance more typical of a totalitarian government than one that respects and protects their personal security and rights.
This is why the United States could find itself in a rebellion that will rival the causes of the Civil War, itself a state’s rights conflict in addition to the issue of slavery that had hung over the Constitution since its ratification; an effort to “kick the can down the road” the Founders agreed to in order to get it ratified.
It is not beyond the imagination that a deliberately created crisis would prompt individual states to withdraw from the Union to protect themselves and their citizens, otherwise known as “the people.”
© Alan Caruba, 2013
Alan has a daily blog called Warning Signs.
Alan can be reached at acaruba@aol.com
Older articles by Alan Caruba
Would States Secede to Protect Their Citizens?
No state has seceded.
No state is going to secede.
This is all entertainment from The Theater of the Absurd.
theater of the absurd - The Free Dictionary
www.thefreedictionary.com/theater+of+the+absurdCached - Similar
A form of drama that emphasizes the absurdity of human existence by employing disjointed, repetitious, and meaningless dialogue, purposeless and confusing ...
It seems the "theater of the absurd" is what this government is doing to the people and the Country...but then if your part of the problem you "prolly" don't see it!!!!
The number of states and the speed at which these petitions are procuring signatures are clear indicators that Americans are displeased with the election results and are waking up to the current administration’s flagrant corruption.
Something about smoke and fire comes to mind!!!
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the coming months as the executive branch releases all of the regulations and taxes that were cleverly hidden until after the election. Then of course there are the Executive Orders or, as we peons call them, the Royal Decrees.
Peons!!!! No regular folks, or regular people....Isn't that what we hear everywhere now by these so called useful idiot media people...They are constantly calling us that or when they want to make reference to us using the "regular people" name!!!! If your not regular then what are you elitists or I prefer to use " useful idiots" some might say "globalists" , illegals or regular folks, now it is all about labels...of course I have a few choice labels for them as well?????
YES. It will be interesting, like waiting for something to happen after all of the fake articles about how Obama was going to declare marshal law and cancel the election, etc.
(The people who write and post fake articles and/or information are just trying to distract us from what is really happening.)
And while we are all distracted with this they will pass and amnesty for all of the illegal aliens, pass more gun laws, etc.
The more distractions out there
the easier it is for them to sneak things by us. IMO
The Constitution doesn't say anything about this either yet this is happening!! It seems the "theater of the absurd" is what this government is doing to the people and the Country !!
America’s National Cathedral Now Performing Homosexual Weddings
11
http://politicaloutcast.com/wp-conte...al-220x110.jpgThe Washington National Cathedral is the closest thing our country has to an official state church. It plays host to almost all state funerals and inaugural services for newly elected presidents.
In 1893, Congress passed a measure to allow for the construction of a new cathedral in the nation’s capital. The measure was proposed to Congress by the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation, run largely by the first seven Episcopal Bishops of Washington. Construction began in 1907 and was actually completed in 1990 when then President George H.W. Bush presided over the placement of the final finial. Interestingly, in 2011, the National Cathedral received $700,000 in federal funding for repairs due to the earthquake that occurred that year.
The National Cathedral is operated by the Episcopal Church, which is the closest Protestant denomination to the Catholic Church in many ways. It is the official seat of the Bishop of Washington, who at the moment is the Right Reverend Mariann Edgar Budde. It’s also the official seat of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, who at the moment is the Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori. Yep, both church officials are women, which goes against scriptural teachings, and also explains why they have become so liberal.
If you can compromise the Bible and God’s teachings in one area of the church, then why not violate a few more? Well, they are. After same-sex marriage was voted to be legal in Maryland and the District of Columbia in November, Budde decided to allow for the inclusion of same-sex marriage ceremonies in church practices.
Rev. Gary Hall, the newly appointed Dean of the National Cathedral welcomes the idea of performing same-sex marriages in iconic sanctuary. Hall believes that this will help break down barriers and open up more opportunity to reach the community in way that reflects God’s diversity. He told the press:
“I read the Bible as seriously as fundamentalists do. And my reading of the Bible leads me to want to do this because I think it’s being faithful to the kind of community that Jesus would have us be.”All I can say is that he’s not reading the same Bible I am because it clearly says that homosexuality is an abomination. But, when your top church leaders defy God’s Word in one area, it’s easy to do so in other areas as well. I just wonder how much longer God will wait before unleashing His wrath on our nation for turning from Him and His ways? I’m getting older and facing God’s wrath on our nation is really the only thing that truly scares me anymore. In fact, I find the idea terrifying, for even those who are faithful and standing strong for God will suffer the wrath He will bring down on the nation as a whole. If you don’t believe, read what happened to Daniel and his friends when God judged his nation. He was taken captive into Babylon and was not treated well at all.
“As a kind of tall-steeple, public church in the nation’s capital, by saying we’re going to bless same-sex marriages, conduct same-sex marriages, we are really trying to take the next step for marriage equality in the nation and in the culture.”
America’s National Cathedral Now Performing Homosexual Weddings
posted by John Doe post #96
http://www.alipac.us/images/alipac_s...quote_icon.png Originally Posted by kathyet http://www.alipac.us/images/alipac_s...post-right.png
The thing is they are working on it, a while back no State or Local Government would have even dreamed of doing it before
Post #95
John Doe When you quote me take my whole quote or don't take it at all....here is my original quoted post:
The thing is they are working on it, a while back no State or Local Government would have even dreamed of doing it before.....Just goes to show where there is smoke there is fire...I am not sure I agree with the secession idea because I think it could mean divide and conquer for us all. I feel were much stronger as a nation standing together and secede from the government manipulators,judges and etc by withholding taxes, and other things they take from us against our will we need to force them to abide by the Constitution.
I find you do this quite often and it is very hard to find from where my post originated....
Thank You
Funny but I don't find it distracting at all I find it very easy to see when our government is screwing us over.....the thing I dislike is that they are doing in many ways and at the same time!! But then there are many of the (useful idiots) in power and worker B's and few of us who see it and are trying to fight it!!
you know what this is... A Warning Sign; nothing more at this point .... you would have to be looney to think Obama or any other POTUS would OK it ... but it is one of MANY warning signs that are occuring all over the country. This one happened to be a HUGE NEON sign that people erected for the politicians to see directly in front of them. The American people have had enough of Temporary Politicians trying to enact "Permanent" Draconian Law's on a very pissed off populace and DC better pay heed or the sign comes down ... DC should be happy to let people vent their anger... when they cant vent; the SHTF from 0-60 fast
5 Mins Ago by Arthur Hampton
A Biblical Perspective On Secession
http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-con...on-220x220.jpg Christianity entails a moral code based on the Word of God, which pertains to every area of life (2 Tim. 3:16 cf.). Contrary to popular belief, this moral code does include the role of the civil government and the Christian’s role in relation to the civil government as an individual. The Civil Government is should be, “a minister of God to you for good . . . an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil” (Rom. 13:4 NASB). In other words, the civil government is to bring evildoers to justice. In addition, the Christian’s responsibility as an individual “is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God” (Rom 13:1 NASB). Since God established the “governing authorities” “whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God” (Rom. 13:2 NASB). How can a Christian submit to the civil government, who God has ordained and still secede from the federal union? The purpose of this article is to explore whether secession from the union is ethically right or wrong within the moral standard of Christianity, by examining the relationship between God and the civil government, the extent of civil obedience, the morality of civil disobedience, and previous secessions.
The Relationship Between God and State
God holds the position of Governor of all creation because God gave creation existence, “for from Him and through Him and to Him are all things” (Rom. 11:36 NASB). Every institute, nation, or civil government is held responsible to another institute, nation, or civil government; moreover, all civil governments or institutions are ultimately responsible to God. The civil government is an ordained institution of God (Rom. 13:1-2). The civil government is an essential function to justice by promoting good and welfare through punishing criminals and preventing crime (Rom. 13:3-4). God also defined justice, sin, and evil, and without God, the civil government would arbitrarily punish people. In short, God is the authority that gave the civil government the power of the sword, and the government must morally act within those bounds.
The Extent of Civil Obedience
Christ said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Matt 22:21 NASB). The civil government is under the Law of God, and He has given the world certain institutes to protect him from the evil act of man, which is a result of the fallen state of man (Rom. 13:1-2). However, when the civil government commands the Christian to act contrary to the Word of God, the Christian should follow the Word of God rather than the civil government. If the state does not act within the bounds God has set, then the state is acting without proper authority, which is tyranny. If tyranny continues, Francis Schaffer stated, “at a certain point there is not only the right, but the duty, to disobey the state.” Tyranny is ruling outside of what God has commanded; moreover, a tyrannical state is immoral. Rutherford argued that since tyranny is satanic in nature, to resisting tyranny is to honor God. Rutherford also asserted that the ruler has civil power conditionally, and if this individual violated this power, the people have the right impeach the individual in power.
Morality of Civil Disobedience
The Christian must disobey the civil institute if the state deliberately requires disobedience to the Law of God. When the civil government requires sin of the Christian, the individual is first to take legal action in protest; however, if this fails, he or she should withdraw from the government and escape. In addition, if escape is not an alternative, force is allowed, if necessary, in defense. On the contrary, when the civil government requires a corporate body to act contrary to God’s Law, often, escape is unrealistic; therefore, when protest fails, use of force is the next course of action. If at all possible, the state should act under the protection of the lesser authorities because the lesser authority in office is a minister of God just like the greater authority. The lesser official must impeach or remove from office any greater magistrate who will not act according to the Law of God. The use of force may sometimes be necessary; however, there must be legitimate grounds in order to use force, and if the grounds are not legitimate, force then becomes unnecessary violence, such as the ungodly revolutions in France. Augustine asserted that just wars are within Christianity’s moral code; however, these wars must be fought under a legitimate authority in order to establish peace and to bring justice.
In this fallen world, a time may come when physical force is necessary. This course of action is only appropriate when all other courses have been exhausted; such is the case of the War of Independence.
Secession of the Colonies (War of Independence)
Christians must resist the federal government through just defensive wars at the command of the lesser governments. The first successful secession of the time, that of the colonies, originated after the British incurred national debt due to the Seven Years’ War with France and the costs to control the Native American tribes. The first Lord of the Treasury, George Grenville (1763); introduced three major reform programs to enact on the colonies: contain American settlers east of the Appalachian Mountains, in order to tax the fur trade, force observance of the Navigation Acts to bring more wealth to Great Britain, and compel the colonists to contribute directly to British military. The main objective of Grenville was to make the colonies more supportive of the British Empire.
British Parliament enacted a wide range of restrictions on colonial trade from 1660-1732; however, in 1733, Parliament passed the Sugar Act, which imposed heavy taxation on sugar, molasses, and rum. This act amounted to 100% on these goods, which gave British West Indian sugar industries a monopoly of the market, raising tension between the colonies and Britain.
The English constitution entailed certain basic rights of Englishmen, and one of those rights was no taxation without representation. In addition, the English Bill of Rights included that these fundamental rights “shall stand, Remain and be the law of this realm forever.” This principle was between the Englishman, King, and parliament; “no taxation without representation” did not change from Englishman in England to Englishman in an English colony. The Virginia colonial charter supported this principle in 1606, which pertained that all the King’s people living in the colonies “shall have and enjoy all Liberties, Franchises and Immunities . . . as if they had been abiding and born within this our Realm of England.”
Moreover, this principle again was affirmed in the British Colonial Naturalization Act in 1740 entailing that persons in the colonies “shall be deemed, adjudged, and taken to be his Majesty’s natural born subjects . . . as if they, and every of them, had been or were born within this kingdom.” In the situation where the civil government contradicts itself, to obey one law is to disobey the other law, and to obey the other law is to disobey the first law; the Christian is free to do what is right according to God. In the case of the War of Independence, the colonial Christians subjected themselves to the colonial civil government, who deemed that the British Government broke their covenant with the people by violating the English constitution through taxation without representation; succeeded just like a man who caught his wife in adultery has the right to divorce her because she is in violation of her covenant with him.
The use of force is appropriate only after all avenues of protest have closed, and when the Christian uses force, this force must be in a defensive fashion. The Law of God does not condone the Boston Tea Party. They violated the Law of God by stealing, which is an unlawful way of protest. In actuality, the War of Independence was a “counter revolution;” the colonists defended themselves against the British revolutionaries who attempted to overthrow the legitimate colonial government.
Secession of the South (War Of Northern Aggression)
The secession of the South resulted in the Civil War, which was the most causality-producing war America has ever had since the founding of this nation; however, was the secession warranted? Prior to the Declaration of Independence, many colonies had impeached their royal governors, which was an act of state sovereignty. The states created the federal government as an agent to perform duties the states could not otherwise perform individually; moreover, the federal government only had the power that the states specifically delegated to the federal government. The states formed the Federal Union, and in doing so, they did not forfeit their rights as sovereign states. If a state chooses to secede from the Federal Union, then the Union would have no right to stop the state. The secession is a Constitutional right of the state. The Articles of Confederation entail “each State retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence.” In this situation, secession is lawful for the state without violation of the Constitution.
After Lincoln’s election, South Carolina called for a State Convention. In the session, South Carolina passed an ordinance of Secession and made a Declaration to justify the Secession of the state from the federal union.
Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: The right of a State to govern itself, and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted. And concurrent with the establishment of these principles, was the fact that each Colony became, and was recognized by the mother Country as a Free, Sovereign, and Independent State.
After South Carolina seceded from the Union, the Federal troops had no right to be in the state and should have left; however, this was not the case at Fort Sumter. Federal troops occupied the fort unlawfully, and the Southern forces, in defense of the state of South Carolina, began firing on the fort on April 12 at 4:30 in the morning. The Civil War was a just war because the war was defensive in nature against Northern aggression; the legitimate leaders of the government were in power; and the Southern states waged the war to establish peace. The Bible does allow for this war because the war was a just war, and the Christians at the time remained in submission to the governing authority, which was defending against Northern aggression (Rom, 13:1-2).
Romans 13:1-7
Among all the passages pertaining to the relationship between the Christian and the civil government, Romans 13 is the most extensive indeed. Two main views of this passage entail different interpretations of Romans 13:1-7. The normative view sees Paul as prescribing what proper government is. In contrast, the descriptive view maintains that the Apostle gave an inspired description of the actual government. A descriptive view of the passage is the positivistic approach that gives autonomy to the state from God. On the contrary, other views maintain all civil governments are approved of God and that the Christian is responsible for obeying this government except when the state prohibits the preaching of the gospel. A descriptive view of this passage overlooks the logic and grammar of class descriptions. In Rom. 13:3, “rulers” is used in the plural form, designating a class not a specific ruler. The normative interpretation maintains Paul noted what civil governments ought to be and do in relation to the individual. The repetition of subornation to the state also entails that Paul is speaking theologically.
Romans 13:1-7 has two elements: what is commanded of the civil government and what is commanded of the Christian. Paul also affirmed that the civil government is an institution divinely appointed (Rom. 13:1); moreover, submitting to the state is to submit to God. Twice, Paul refers to the state as a “minister of God” (Rom. 13:4,6), which reveals the responsibility of the state to God. In this responsibility, the civil government ought to enforce the appropriate commandments of God, because God alone can define what justice is and prescribe the proper punishment to injustice in social matters. To remove God from civil government is to promote tyranny.
CONCLUSION
More often than not, after a lesser government declares secession from a greater civil government, war generally follows between the two governments. However, secession should be the last option after all other attempts at reform and protest have failed. Just like church discipline, the proper order must be followed; otherwise the Christian would be in violation of God’s law. The Christian’s duty is to try to live peacefully with others if at all possible (Heb. 12:14). But when peace is not an option, God does allow for civil disobedience, and this disobedience may just be secession from a greater tyrannical government through a lesser government. In short, there comes a point in which secession in some situations may be appropriate if Christians have exhausted all other options.
1. Gary DeMar, God and Government: A Biblical and Historical Study (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision Inc., 2001), 49-51.
2. Ibid., 67-69.
3. Greg Bahnsen, Theonomy in Christian Ethics (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media, 2002), 360.
4. Francis A. Schaeffer, “A Christian Manifesto,” The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer: A Christian View of The West(Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 1982), 468.
5. Ibid., 469.
6. Schaffer, 474.
7. Ibid., 475.
8. Ibid., 476.
9. Schaffer, 478,82.
10. John S. Feinberg, and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Books, 1993), 347.
11. Ibid., 483.
12. Samuel Rutherford, Lex, Rex (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle, 1982), 141.
13. Richard Alan Ryerson, “Origins of the American Revolution,” The Encyclopedia of The American Revolutionary War, 1:5.
14. Ibid.
15. Bernhard Knollenberg, Origin of the American Revolution (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2002), 139-40.
16. Knollenberg, 149.
17. Ibid., 151.
18. Ibid.
19. Schaeffer, 483.
20. Ibid.
21. James Ronald Kennedy, and Walter Donald Kennedy, The South was Right! (Gretna, Louisiana: Pelican Publishing Company Inc. 1994), 161,223-24.
22. John Spence, The American Union: An Inquiry into the Causes of the War Between the States by an Impartial British Observer (Wiggins, Mississippi: Crown Rights Book Company, 1862), 200-01.
23. S. A. Ashe, A Southern View of the Invasion of the Southern States and War of 1861-65 (Crawfordville, GA: Ruffin Flag Company, 193, 41.
24. Bruce Catton, The Coming Fury (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961), 311-13.
25. D. James Kennedy, How Would Jesus Vote: A Christian Perspective on the Issues (Colorado Springs: WaterBrook, 200, 78.
26. Bahnsen, 356.
27. Ibid., 357.
28. Bahnsen, 360.
29. Ibid., 365-367.
30. Ibid., 377.
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/06/a-...-on-secession/
Looks like nothing has happened with the secession movement. That must have been another internet false flag.
https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...85598777_q.jpg 1 Million Moms & Women For The 2nd Amendment via Craig Bushon
Texas Doesn't Need To Secede; Tis Better For The Union To Join Texas And Succeed. Time to dust those boots off buckaroos! - SIG
Posted On 27 Aug 2013
By : Forbes
https://static.xx.fbcdn.net/rsrc.php...PAXP-deijE.gifTexas Doesn't Need To Secede; Tis Better For The Union To Join Texas And Succeed
craigbushonshow.comIt’s sure a good thing that Texas has lots of space, because a booming economy is bringing in lots of people. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the number of Texas jobs has gr...
PAGE 1 OF 3: http://craigbushonshow.com/texas-doe...s-and-succeed/
PAGE 2 OF 3: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...and-succeed/2/
PAGE 3 OF 3: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybel...and-succeed/3/