Is it time for the States to secede from the Union? --- we've tried that ... they'll kill you and take your assets.
got'ny other suggestions? On Nov 14, 10:08 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Is it time for the States to secede from the Union?Posted by Austin Petersen > on 14 Nov 2012When in the course of human events…Citizens from thirty out of > fifty states in America have filed for secession from the Union. > PresidentBarack Obama‘s petition website ranks Texas alone as having over > 80,000 signatures. Petitions receiving more than 25,000 signatures qualify > for an official response from the White House. The President is honor bound, > but not legally required to make a statement to citizens who are demanding > that they be allowed to break away and form separate sovereign republics. > WhenBenjamin Franklinfirst began diplomatic negotiations with the British > before the War of Independence, he was undoubtedly on the side of the > Loyalists. However, as a long train of abuses made it abundantly clear that > there would be taxation without representation, self-written search warrants > by soldiers and the endangerment of American trade via British Imperialism > (If Britain were to declare war, all her colonies were at war as well), > Franklin decided it was time to separate and declare Independence fromKing > George III. He was one of the last of the founders to do so. > America was built on secession. After her successful break from Britain, The > Union was established to “secure these rights among men.” The Constitution as > it was written was a great compromise at a convention built on guile and > intrigue amongst America’s founding fathers. The competing factions at that > hall in Philadelphia ultimately sowed the seeds for the partisan divide in > politics we have today. Federalists wanted a strong central government. > Anti-Federalists wanted none of it. The Federalists won and the > Anti-Federalists backstopped our liberties the best they could with a Bill of > Rights. These United States were born. We successfully seceded. > There was secession again in 1860. When the many States of the South formed a > compact, a Confederacy, to maintain certain economic liberties as well as the > practice of chattel slavery. These Americans risked their lives for > principles that were right and for some that were undoubtedly wrong. > Ultimately because of their loss our nation became stronger in some ways and > weaker in others. For the price of freeing the slaves, we slammed shut the > door that would allow states to peacefully withdraw from a union they > peacefully joined. > We do still honor the confederacy in this country. We do not honor those men > because of slavery however. We honor them because of their willingness to > sacrifice their lives for the spirit of Independence. President Barack Obama > acknowledged this when he deliberatelylaid a wreathat the Confederate > memorial at Arlington despite pleas from his supporters to cease. He > rightfully understood that the events of that struggle were more than just > one issue and that the 750,000 men who died did not do so in vain. There were > real ideas at stake in this war and bought sides had principles that were > correct. Most of these principles would remain when the wartime Income Tax > was declared unconstitutional and the US was placed on a gold standard for a > short period. > Now, fresh on the heels of the presidents reelection comes the wave of > citizens petitioning for their states to be independent. Doubtless many > Americans are reeling from the expectations of tax increases on small > business owners, the implementation costs of Obamacare and the long term > effects of a $16 trillion dollar debt. Many of them are feeling desperate and > without options to escape the crushing burden of taxation, debt and > regulations inflicted on them by an uncaring federal government. > But, is it time to secede again?No.But it is time to talk about what it > means.The topic of secession is not uncommon in DC socialite circles. It will > often go to the American Civil War and whether or not States should be added > or allowed to secede. As a test of the audience, I like to ask a simple > question and gauge peoples responses. My question I ask is, “If the State of > California decided to secede over federal drug raids or because they wanted > gay marriage, would you advocate that we roll tank into Sacramento?” If they > say no then I respond, “Then you’re a confederate.” And think about this: If > Puerto Rico, which recently voted in favor of statehood, were to join the > Union, and then four years later decide to leave; would you advocate we > invade and kill the citizens of that island? Some people do suggest we > respond with violence. Supporters of the President and his agenda have > launched their own petitions asking that those who signed a secession > petition be stripped of their citizenship. But why if you believe in Union do > you suggest those who wish to leave be stripped of their rights? Are we to > ship them off to Gitmo next? > Some secessionists point to the Declaration of Independence as their document > that gives them claim to secession. The words are:“When in the Course of > human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political > bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers > of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and > of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind > requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the > separation.”This seems to give us the idea that we do have a right to alter > or abolish our forms of government and I would agree in theory. However, one > glaring problem with the Declaration is that it is not the law of the land. > As a legal document, the Declaration only holds weight insofar as it created > a temporary union to defeat Great Britain. It is not used today as a legal > document or precedent other than a symbolic one. Citizens of the United > States are descendants of the tradition of secession, but the formation of > the Constitution created a system of positive law, rather than Natural Law > that the framers instilled into the Declaration. America is not operating > under the Articles of Confederation and thus the Declaration of Independence > is not applicable in this case. If citizens were to write a new one however, > that might be a different story. > But despite all of this, should we retain the right to alter our government > or even abolish it? Undoubtedly yes. Thomas Paine once wrote“The parliament > or the people of 1688, or of any other period, has no more right to dispose > of the people of the present day, or to bind or to control them in any shape > whatever, than the parliament or the people of the present day have to > dispose of, bind or control those who are to live a hundred or a thousand > years hence. Every generation is, and must be, competent to all the purposes > which its occasions require. It is the living, and not the dead, that are to > be accommodated. When man ceases to be, his power and his wants cease with > him; and having no longer any participation in the concerns of this world, he > has no longer any authority in directing who shall be its governors, or how > its government shall be organized, or how administered.”It is sensible to > understand that men who died long ago cannot bind future generations > permanently to a any set of laws or document.Lysander Spooner, abolitionist > and entrepreneur illustrated it in this way: If a father builds a house for > a family, can he compel them to live in it? If he plants a fruit tree for his > children to eat one day, can he compel them to eat from it? Of course not. So > then it must be understood that the citizens of the United States can not be > compelled to toil forever under a constitution that is so obviously defunct > in our modern era. Spooner went on to explain in his treatise “No Treason” > that:“The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no > authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And > it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now > existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living > eighty years ago. [This essay was written in 1869.] And it can be supposed to > have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to years > of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and obligatory > contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even > of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or > permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. > Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead > now.”But if we are not to be governed under the constitution forever, what > should be our guide going forward? Paine and Spooner are correct in that we > can not forever be bound by one system of laws written by people long gone? > We must be able to adapt to change. The question is; Are we stronger > individually if we act as a Union, or would be stronger independently as > sovereign republics? > The author of this piece believes that now is not the time for secession > despite the many usurpations of our rights we are currently suffering. Having > traveled from sea to shining sea of this great nation in the past few years > has convinced me of the individual benefits that we receive as Americans to > be able to travel freely from state to state. Growing up on a farm in > Missouri, living in New York City for eight years and now in Washington D.C. > for four, I have witnessed more beauty in one nation than could ever exist in > any heaven dreamed of. To secede might mean to lose access to the wilds of > New Hampshire should they shut us out. How tragic would be the loss of Texas, > or California if they refused to recognize your citizenship from a neigboring > state? Would we really want to see them shut down and turn their southern > border into a militarized zone? Is that a vision of a peaceful future that we > wish to leave for our children? We need more walls not less. Now it a time > for unity and for us to resist tyranny, not retreat. The libertarian movement > has a saying we like to repeat from the Latin: “Tu Ne Cede Malissed contra > audentior ito“. It means “Do not give in to evil, but proceed ever more > boldly against it.” The citizens of America have a duty not to shrink away > from evil. We must proceed boldly against it. > Our forefathers brought forth on this continent a new nation conceived in > liberty. And though we have lost our way many times, we have also gained many > rights and privileges as well including the abolition of chattel slavery and > womens suffrage. From California, to New York City and everything in between, > we the citizens of the United States are blessed to live in a free nation. If > we have oppressive government then we should not shrink away from it in > resignation. Don’t give up the fight for individual liberty and cede ground > to the forced unionists who talk of liberty but demand ever increasing > taxation. A quick look at the electoral map from the 2012 election shows that > only a tiny portion of this country is blue, the red far outpaces them in > terms of overall territory. You would cede ground to these tiny holdouts of > progressivism? > Only a very small portion of the United States regionally are dominated by > Democrats > You want to take your ball and go home and just give up on the rest of the > nation? What about the liberties of those people in your neighboring states? > Do they not deserve to be free of socialized medicine and confiscatory > taxation? Will you not stand with your brothers in arms who are fighting the > state through grassroots organization and peaceful democratic action? Is the > fight for America truly over? > No friends. It’s not time to secede. It’s time to stand our ground and fight > for this nation from the forces of corporatism, socialism and tyranny. It’s > time to hold onto what we have and fight to make it more free for our > posterity. As we are grateful to our ancestors, so will our descendants be if > we give them a strong, unified nation built on the ideas of liberty and > peace. It can only happen if we fight for it and work together across state > lines. Even now, versions of the founders “Committees of Correspondence” > exist on the Internet. The first American Patriots established the committees > to develop communication networks devoted to keeping Patriots informed. At > the time their only method was to send letters. FreedomWorks has established > its own modern version throughFreedomConnector, which allows local activists > to connect and work together. Citizens in neighboring states can even come in > and find their neighbors and help them in their campaigns and ballot > initiatives. > Also, why leap immediately to secession when there is a much easier option > and one less prone to bloodshed? A growingNullificationmovement is budding in > the United States today. The founders gave us a powerful tool to combat > federal tyranny in theTenth Amendment. The Amendment reads:“The powers not > delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to > the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”This > is a clear authority given to the States and individuals to claim rights that > are not written in the Bill of Rights. The founders knew that it would be > impossible to fully codify all the privileges and immunities granted by > citizenship so they left us this powerful tool to fight back with. Already > states Arizona, Idaho, Virginia and Utah have passed legislation that > declares certain provisions of Obamacare null and void. The Governor of > IdahoButch Otter, even passed legislation that required Utah to sue the > federal government if they are forced to buy health insurance. Look to the > growth of the tenth amendment movement as a sign Americans are working to > restore what was lost and that there is hope for the future. > Also individual citizens must begin to use more aggressively their right > ofjury nullification. Jury nullification is when a jury acquits a defendant > who is technically guilty of a law, but who does not deserve punishment. It > occurs when a verdict opposed to the judge’s instructions is handed down by > citizen activists sitting on a jury. It has been used before and has > experienced renewed energy in places like New Hampshire, where a jury > recentlyacquitted a man for growing marijuana for medical uses. A single > informed citizen sitting on a jury can have a more powerful effect than an > entire house of legislators. > Tools such as jury nullification, the Tenth Amendment and our committees of > correspondence are our modern weapons to fight tyranny without needless > bloodshed, or the loss of our country as a whole. The time now is to fight > and work together and to use these tools. It is not time to leave. We must > stand and fight. We must proceed boldly against evil. > However, if things change for the worse and we are denied the right of > redress of grievances… > I reserve the right to > secede.http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/is-it-time-for-the-states-to-secede-from-the-union/ -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
