Commerce Clause discussion

[vegas giants]

Wow! The violence. I sense it.

Life is hardball buddy

 

[Samwise]

So you want to leave peacefully, I take it?

Me? No. I'm not important. I'm discussing the constitution and pointing out that it contains no prohibition against any of the states from exiting the treaty.

 

[vegas giants]

I know. They can't cite any prohibition.

Let's say there was. So what?


Let's say there isn't. So what?


Lol

 

[Samwise]

Life is hardball buddy

So these troops you send in... would they be wearing Jackboots?

 

[Cordelier]

Me? No. I'm not important. I'm discussing the constitution and pointing out that it contains no prohibition against any of the states from exiting the treaty.

What made you think a thread about the Commerce Clause was the place to bring that up?

 

[vegas giants]

So these troops you send in... would they bel wearing Jackboots?

Maybe. Depends on the mission

 

[Samwise]

Let's say there was. So what?


Let's say there isn't. So what?


Lol

So, if they can't cite the language I say doesn't exist, then I guess my assertion is correct.

 

[vegas giants]

So, if they can't cite the language I say doesn't exist, then I guess my assertion is correct.

Yay. You are the winner of the pointless discussion!!!! Lol

 

[Samwise]

Maybe. Depends on the mission

I can't get behind the thuggery.

But also, are you able to cite the language prohibiting any of the states from quitting the union?

 

[Samwise]

Yay. You are the winner of the pointless discussion!!!! Lol

Yeah. No prohibition. That's what I said like 97 million pages ago.

 

[vegas giants]

I can't get behind the thuggery.

But also, are you able to cite the language prohibiting any of the states from quitting the union?

Once they quit they are independent countries.


We may attack at will



Answer this


What part of the constitution demands the US recognize the peaceful secession of a state?

 

[vegas giants]

Yeah. No prohibition. That's what I said like 97 million pages ago.

Run upstairs and tell mom you won.

 

[Samwise]

Once they quit they are independent countries.


We may attack at will



Answer this


What part of the constitution demands the US recognize the peaceful secession of a state?

"Recognize"? I am not aware of any such language.

 

[Cordelier]

So, if they can't cite the language I say doesn't exist, then I guess my assertion is correct.

The language is there, Sam, it's been cited to you ad infinitum, if you'd just open up your eyes and read it. Article IV §3.

When a State enters the Union, it strikes an implicit bargain with the Federal Government. It's a partnership. You can't expect a partnership to be dissolved unilaterally by one side or the other with engendering ill feelings on the part of the other. If you want to do it legally and above-board where both parties can come to an amicable split, then it must be done in a manner where both parties in a mutual agreement and the interests of one are not prejudiced by the actions of the other.

That's just common sense, don't you think?

 

[Samwise]

Run upstairs and tell mom you won.

So...still no prohibition?

And thanks for saying I won. That's sweet.

 

[vegas giants]

"Recognize"? I am not aware of any such language.

Then your argument is moot

 

[Samwise]

The language is there, Sam, it's been cited to you ad infinitum, if you'd just open up your eyes and read it. Article IV §3.

When a State enters the Union, it strikes an implicit bargain with the Federal Government. It's a partnership. You can't expect a partnership to be dissolved unilaterally by one side or the other with engendering ill feelings on the part of the other. If you want to do it legally and above-board where both parties can come to an amicable split, then it must be done in a manner where both parties in a mutual agreement and the interests of one are not prejudiced by the actions of the other.

That's just common sense, don't you think?

What's the language?

 

[vegas giants]

So...still no prohibition?

And thanks for saying I won. That's sweet.

Yay!!!!!!! Lol

 

[Samwise]

Then your argument is moot

It wasn't an argument. It was a statement of fact.

 

[Cordelier]

What's the language?

I've answered that already... you haven't accepted my answer, so now I'm trying a different tack. So I'll ask you to respond to my last post.

 

[Samwise]

I've answered that already... you haven't accepted my answer, so now I'm trying a different tack. So I'll ask you to respond to my last post.

But the constituent state are not territories of themselves. That kind of logically impossible.

 

[vegas giants]

It wasn't an argument. It was a statement of fact.

A ball is round.


Lol

 

[Samwise]

A ball is round.


Lol

You are correct. A ball is round.

 

[Cordelier]

But the constituent state are not territories of themselves. That kind of logically impossible.

Then what is the state seceding from?

 

[vegas giants]

You are correct. A ball is round.

You bring so much to this forum. Lol