• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Regarding Secession...

quebec of canada had a vote to secede or not from canada.. they voted to stay....scotland had a vote 2 years ago to secede from UK they voted to stay.. so its the modern civilized way to secede by voting a simple majority.. this does GO with states and provinces.. liberals in america trying to use force will be laughed at by all of canada and europe
 
SailaWay said:
quebec of canada had a vote to secede or not from canada.. they voted to stay....scotland had a vote 2 years ago to secede from UK they voted to stay.. so its the modern civilized way to secede by voting a simple majority.. this does GO with states and provinces.. liberals in america trying to use force will be laughed at by all of canada and europe
Click to expand...

Well America is the same country that thinks they're authority stretches across the world and they can start a war with anyone they please that disagrees with them. They're also the same country that thinks taxing their citizens living overseas is completely cool.
 
but with the secession of conservatives from liberals.. it is the conservatives with the power the liberals have no power to stop the seceding
 
WELCOME to THE CONSERVATIVE STATES OF AMERICA included is alberta who secedes from canada
 
SailaWay said:
but with the secession of conservatives from liberals.. it is the conservatives with the power the liberals have no power to stop the seceding
Click to expand...

Lets not for get its the conservatives with all the "Other people's money".
 
Goshin said:
As already noted, I agree with the pragmatic assessment of how it really works in the really real world.


However, as a matter of principle and morality, either secession is legitimate or it isn't, and sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander... and arguments that the US had a right to secede from Britain but Texas has no right to secede from the US are merely examples of self-serving propaganda.
Click to expand...

Both sides are self serving. You fight against a secession because of your own self interest and you secede for your own self interest. The man that says secession is ok in some cases and not in others is just determining where his own interests are.
 
yep and the power to secede with conservatives away from liberals is all with the conservatives.. get ready for the change if hillary wins and then liberalism will be destroyed
 
Goshin said:
We, the United States, had NO legal right to secede from Britain, and arguably shaky moral ground to shed so much blood over our grievances against the government of King George. We did it anyway, and here we are.






So either rebellion and secession IS a legitimate act, and secession by a State is therefore legitimate...


...Or rebellion and secession IS NOT a legitimate act, and our current US Federal government is illegitimate due to being formed as part of an illegal/immoral rebellion against our lawful government, the British Empire. (Which may itself call into question whether rebelling against an illegitimate government is right or wrong, lol.)




Discussion invited. :D
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges; revolution vs secession
 
Henrin said:
Both sides are self serving. You fight against a secession because of your own self interest and you secede for your own self interest. The man that says secession is ok in some cases and not in others is just determining where his own interests are.
Click to expand...


In rough and pragmatic reality yes.


My question was about the principle of the thing.
 
Goshin said:
In rough and pragmatic reality yes.


My question was about the principle of the thing.
Click to expand...

The principle of the thing is simple. Stopping a man from self governance is just holding your domain over him against his consent. If that is something you can live with then you should agree with fighting a secession, and if you don't, then you shouldn't.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...


Why?


King George imposed taxes and laws and whatnot that the colonists didn't like and considered oppressive.


The Fedgov imposes taxes and laws and whatnot that Texas doesn't like and considers oppressive.




Are the two really so different, or is it just normalcy bias? The just and right Revolution is accepted historical fact while Texas seceding isn't something most want to consider.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Apples and oranges; revolution vs secession
Click to expand...

There is no real difference. In both cases the people left their government and in both cases their departure would have not left their past rulers without a throne.
 
Goshin said:
Why?


King George imposed taxes and laws and whatnot that the colonists didn't like and considered oppressive.


The Fedgov imposes taxes and laws and whatnot that Texas doesn't like and considers oppressive.




Are the two really so different, or is it just normalcy bias? The just and right Revolution is accepted historical fact while Texas seceding isn't something most want to consider.
Click to expand...


To be fair, the Federal government doesn't toss Texans in prison to rot without a trial or even a charge, or force Texans to garrison troops in their houses.
 
Tigerace117 said:
To be fair, the Federal government doesn't toss Texans in prison to rot without a trial or even a charge, or force Texans to garrison troops in their houses.
Click to expand...




Erm.... actually they could, and probably have. Refer to the Patriot Act, and the undeniable fact that American citizens have been whisked away and held for years without charges, trial or due process.


You can be declared an 'enemy combatant' with the stroke of the President's pen and taken and held in secret indefinately without trial.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_(prisoner)
 
Tigerace117 said:
To be fair, the Federal government doesn't toss Texans in prison to rot without a trial or even a charge, or force Texans to garrison troops in their houses.
Click to expand...

The government can do that, you know. You would actually be hard pressed to find an offense that the founders were fighting against that the US government hasn't done many times worse.
 
Goshin said:
Erm.... actually they could, and probably have. Refer to the Patriot Act, and the undeniable fact that American citizens have been whisked away and held for years without charges, trial or due process.


You can be declared an 'enemy combatant' with the stroke of the President's pen and taken and held in secret indefinately without trial.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_(prisoner)
Click to expand...

They could..... Which doesn't mean they did.

And if somebody actually does support groups like ISIS and AQ, well, they still fare better then those who fall into said groups' hands.
 
Tigerace117 said:
They could..... Which doesn't mean they did.

And if somebody actually does support groups like ISIS and AQ, well, they still fare better then those who fall into said groups' hands.
Click to expand...



Agreed, but the potential for abuse is there. Do we really want government to have the power, without due process, to make American citizens vanish in the night and be held, without charge, incommunicado, indefinitely?


Jose Padilla was an American citizen....
 
Goshin said:
Agreed, but the potential for abuse is there. Do we really want government to have the power, without due process, to make American citizens vanish in the night and be held, without charge, incommunicado, indefinitely?


Jose Padilla was an American citizen....
Click to expand...

An American citizen who wanted to detonate a dirty bomb to kill hundreds if not thousands of other American citizens. I don't feel bad for the guy.

Honestly, while I can see the problem in regards to possible abuse, overall I think the government has been fairly responsible in trying to tread the line between civil liberties and the demands of the populace that they always be kept safe from everything.
 
Tigerace117 said:
An American citizen who wanted to detonate a dirty bomb to kill hundreds if not thousands of other American citizens. I don't feel bad for the guy.

Honestly, while I can see the problem in regards to possible abuse, overall I think the government has been fairly responsible in trying to tread the line between civil liberties and the demands of the populace that they always be kept safe from everything.
Click to expand...



I don't feel bad about him either, except for one thing: he is an American citizen.


That means you, or I, could be treated in exactly the same manner if at some later date they decided speaking out against "X" was sufficient reason to be declared 'an enemy combatant' at the stroke of a pen, signed by the Prez or the AG. Between them I imagine they could sign quite a lot of secret-detention orders each day.

Ah, but this is America, that would never happen! Well, at the moment, the only thing preventing it is the Administration not choosing to use it in that manner. Some people are not confident that a later Admin might not use it to dispose of political enemies...
 
SailaWay said:
NO mass deportations is not the answer but high wisdom tests for voting nd making decisions is THE ANSWER... all types of people are needed in a nation.. different abilities are needed... a bridge cannot be built without all abilities.. but the unwise must not be allowed to vote that is NOT their ability
Click to expand...

So we should stop people from voting for Trump or Clinton?
 
Goshin said:
As I said, unsubstantiated critique.



Since you've no interest in the discussion, you should be off about your business then. :)
Click to expand...

There is no discussion. It's unconstitutional.
 
I'm utterly uninterested in most legal arguments for secession or revolution---they aren't that important. What matters is the ethical, ideological, and moral grounding of such a course of action and its practical implications. Why was Southern secession so atrocious when American secession/revolution was not? Because the bedrock of Southern secession was aimed at expanding white supremacist slave-power with little other primary goals and it would have had disastrous implications for the rest of the United States and by extension the world.

If you believe in the United States, believe in our civilizational importance, than secession is not something to be countenanced.

Edit: Circumstances could obviously arise where secession could be necessary. However I think the patriotic thing would almost always be revolution not secession.
 
Last edited:
the wise founders said yes to states rights and secession and abe lincoln said no.. abe was a criminal to the founders... this issue is not men against men like the civil war this is conservatives against the liberals .. the conservatives have all the power these are the men .. the militry and law enforcement... liberalism is over the dominoes are falling to make this happen.. its simply the law of life
 
this election shows men are for trump and women for hillary.. 95% of black women for hillary.... this comes from america having its lowest IQ's ever voting this cannot last it never does and why the founders said there never was a democracy that did not commit suicide.... the founders would NOT let the UNWISE vote and that made the greatest nation
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom