Resistance, Secession, Sovereignty and State's Rights

[INVAR]

The Constitution shows us how.  Shows us what the limits ARE and how to address violators.

Violated and broken by every branch supposed to be a check on the power of the others. 

Right now, there are NO LIMITS to what the Beast can, or will do "legally".  That they can now MANDATE you purchase what they say you must purchase, they have as legal precedent the ability to tell you what you may not own, possess, purchase or even desire.

And how to bypass the Federal government when Congress, which has turned on its people, refuse to enforce the Constitution or to consider Amendments.

The States lost their legislative body with Direct Election of Senators.  That has to be reversed; and then TERM LIMITS. 

And if an Article V convention is rejected, and even as the laborious process of going around roadblock politicians IS going on, work towards State Secession.

That was settled in 1865, and there is no longer an option to walk away from the Beast, and too many state government dependents in each state upon the free-flow of federal funds to allow that to happen even if a legislature attempted it.

Money talks - principles walk in this day and age.

Remember, Secession need not be permanent or even carried through.  It's pulling down the fire hoses, as other attempts to control the bonfire are tried but are failing.

You cannot stop tyranny via civil means.  Period.

The Lawless wil not abide new laws.

The corrupt will corrupt further any attempts to leash their activities.

Oligarchs will only lay down laws for others while exempting themselves.

A people that their government holds in contempt, have absolutely no power to contend with the avarice and ambition of tyrants except the threat and use of force to impose limits on said tyrants.

The ballot box is no longer an option by any stretch of reality.  It has become as corrupted as corrupt gets.

This government no longer fears we the people, they despise us and work tirelessly to impoverish and make us slaves to their will and impositions.  A very nasty fate awaits a people when their government sees them the way this federal beast sees you and I.

[roamer_1]

Indeed, the supine posture of the Republican majorities is infuriating. Regardless of the reason (greed, corruption, cowardice, gullibility, stupidity) the cession of the exercise if Congressional responsibility to the Exeutive  has become baked in.

A product of the 'lesser evil'...

So which of the binary choice (there I go again  ) is more likely to motivate the Congress to break with recent precedent and assume its lawful and vital role in checking the Executive?

Neither one.

This isn't a matter of Democrat v. Republican.

This is a matter of Liberal v. Conservative.
and a matter of statesmen v. politicians.

Continuing to bolster politicians, who are habitual liars as a job description, will continue us right down the road we are on.
Statesmen BELIEVE in what they say, and have a record to prove it. Oddly enough, so do true Conservatives.

to vote for otherwise will do no more than endorse yet another lying politician to take even more of our rights away. It gonna take holding out for statesmen - true believers that actually WANT limited government, and restored freedom - and not just one guy - every_single_SOB, and that at every_single level.

That statesman, in this election right here, right now, is Castle - and there is no other (unless E. McMuffin turns into something). To settle for anything else is just more lesser evil.

[JustPassinThru]

That was settled in 1865, and there is no longer an option to walk away from the Beast, and too many state government dependents in each state upon the free-flow of federal funds to allow that to happen even if a legislature attempted it.

Not by law, it was not.  A LEGAL question was settled through FORCE OF ARMS.

The proponents, perhaps believing it themselves, miscast the argument as that of slavery; not one of the right of Sovereign States to Secede.  They pretended a moral high ground they did not occupy.  Whether for just reasons or unjust, the rights of the sovereign Southern States were trampled.

The dynamics have shifted - greatly. It is Washington which is bankrupt - monetarily and morally.  They have not the means, not the people, with our politicized, group-identity armed forces.  They do not have the moral high ground.  All they have are government printing presses - and that magic won't last.

The Red States have moral authority; they have the history of America and the success of American principles all on their sides.  Most of them are tax PRODUCING, not tax CONSUMING regions.  Most of them are resource rich.

And the people, in Red states and in many Blue regions, are READY.

You cannot stop tyranny via civil means.  Period.

The Lawless wil not abide new laws.

Which is why Secession is necessary.  It need not be violent but it needs to be backed with the CREDIBLE THREAT of force.

That is why I say an Article V Convention, although a worthwhile aim, is probably not going to be enough.

The corrupt will corrupt further any attempts to leash their activities.

Oligarchs will only lay down laws for others while exempting themselves.

A people that their government holds in contempt, have absolutely no power to contend with the avarice and ambition of tyrants except the threat and use of force to impose limits on said tyrants.

The ballot box is no longer an option by any stretch of reality.  It has become as corrupted as corrupt gets.

This government no longer fears we the people, they despise us and work tirelessly to impoverish and make us slaves to their will and impositions.  A very nasty fate awaits a people when their government sees them the way this federal beast sees you and I.

So, you put national boundaries between the corrupt New Sodom which is Washington, and your own state/region.

The alternative is to acquiesce.  Acquiescence is surrender.  And evil people do not understand mercy or justice.  Surrender is, effectively, suicide.

[r9etb]

The Constitution shows us how.  Shows us what the limits ARE and how to address violators.

And how to amend it when gaps or flaws show up.

And how to bypass the Federal government when Congress, which has turned on its people, refuse to enforce the Constitution or to consider Amendments.

The States lost their legislative body with Direct Election of Senators.  That has to be reversed; and then TERM LIMITS. 

And if an Article V convention is rejected, and even as the laborious process of going around roadblock politicians IS going on, work towards State Secession.

Remember, Secession need not be permanent or even carried through.  It's pulling down the fire hoses, as other attempts to control the bonfire are tried but are failing.

You're still just saying things, though.  "Oh, well, we'll just threaten to secede!  That'll show 'em!"

But you've again left off the precise "how" of the matter.  You'd need to get buy-in from a significant portion of the populace.  But heck: if you're in a position to get that sort of buy-in, you've got the means of making a change without something so drastic as secession; in fact, you'd get a lot more buy-in from a lot more people if secession was not part of your sales pitch.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

You're still just saying things, though.  "Oh, well, we'll just threaten to secede!  That'll show 'em!"

But you've again left off the precise "how" of the matter.  You'd need to get buy-in from a significant portion of the populace.  But heck: if you're in a position to get that sort of buy-in, you've got the means of making a change without something so drastic as secession; in fact, you'd get a lot more buy-in from a lot more people if secession was not part of your sales pitch.

I don't think you even need to call it secession. If a group of governors told the federal government. You are acting outside the authority of the Constitution. We don't need your money and we aren't following you laws and we will forcibly remove any federal agents you send to our state. You would need a good issue(Obamacare, or the Bundy stand off part 1 come to mind) to pull this off. Like the government shut down that didn't cause all of the panic that was expected, the feds would find out they are not as important as they think.

Since the states will never even consider leaving the federal feed trough it's just a pipe dream. The time when men couldn't be bought is long past. You will never get men of integrity elected they just aren't entertaining enough in the outrage and laugh a minute reality TV show that is politics.

In short, we've been had.

[JustPassinThru]

You're still just saying things, though.  "Oh, well, we'll just threaten to secede!  That'll show 'em!"

But you've again left off the precise "how" of the matter.  You'd need to get buy-in from a significant portion of the populace.  But heck: if you're in a position to get that sort of buy-in, you've got the means of making a change without something so drastic as secession; in fact, you'd get a lot more buy-in from a lot more people if secession was not part of your sales pitch.

I'm not saying, threaten.  I'm saying DO IT.

In an orderly way.  Why do we want Secession?  To preserve law and order at the local and State levels.  To prevent Federal goons from doing neighborhood searches for guns, gold, stored foodstuffs, young girls, and anything else that would be of interest to them.

Not saying you get twelve of your closest friends to mass up with guns at the state lines.  The STATE LEGISLATURES have to do this.  With, of course, consent of the State citizens - which the State legislature is going to have to solicit.  Or else claim emergency powers to enact Secession.

Obviously it won't work everywhere.  You will not get Illinois to Secede.  They're a tax-consuming state that's right in line ideologically with the parasites in Washington.  California will not, unless it's to create a race-based nation-state of metistos.

So be it.  It's not IMPORTANT what New York, Massachusetts and Vermont and California do.  The point is to PROTECT YOUR CITIZENS.  From an out-of-control Washington hell-bent on social-engineering and forcible redistribution of wealth.  From invasion by aliens from Islamic nations.  FROM ALL this instability and insanity.

You try.  Maybe you fail; but you try.  In war, soldiers fail and die.

In political prisons, prisoners meekly walk to the gallows.

[r9etb]

I don't think you even need to call it secession. If a group of governors told the federal government. You are acting outside the authority of the Constitution. We don't need your money and we aren't following you laws and we will forcibly remove any federal agents you send to our state. You would need a good issue(Obamacare, or the Bundy stand off part 1 come to mind) to pull this off. Like the government shut down that didn't cause all of the panic that was expected, the feds would find out they are not as important as they think.

Since the states will never even consider leaving the federal feed trough it's just a pipe dream. The time when men couldn't be bought is long past. You will never get men of integrity elected they just aren't entertaining enough in the outrage and laugh a minute reality TV show that is politics.

In short, we've been had.

Well, yes.... But the point is, in order to do anything about this, requires a broad consensus over a significant number of people.  The problem lies in a) finding the means to build that consensus, and b) having the patience to go about actually doing it.

The left has kindly provided a handy roadmap for how to do it. 

[INVAR]

I don't think you even need to call it secession. If a group of governors told the federal government. You are acting outside the authority of the Constitution. We don't need your money and we aren't following you laws and we will forcibly remove any federal agents you send to our state. You would need a good issue(Obamacare, or the Bundy stand off part 1 come to mind) to pull this off. Like the government shut down that didn't cause all of the panic that was expected, the feds would find out they are not as important as they think.

Since the states will never even consider leaving the federal feed trough it's just a pipe dream. The time when men couldn't be bought is long past. You will never get men of integrity elected they just aren't entertaining enough in the outrage and laugh a minute reality TV show that is politics.

In short, we've been had.

BINGO and DITTO!

[r9etb]

I'm not saying, threaten.  I'm saying DO IT.

Nah.  You're just saying, and that's all you're doing.  How are you going to build a sufficiently large body of the populace so that your threat (if we can even call it that) carries any weight?

Well...?

[JustPassinThru]

Nah.  You're just saying, and that's all you're doing.  How are you going to build a sufficiently large body of the populace so that your threat (if we can even call it that) carries any weight?

Well...?

You sell the idea.

You solicit support and gain allies.  As with ANY political movement.

You do NOT pick a small, useless patch and make a stand.  It didn't work for John Brown at Harper's Ferry; it didn't work for various resistance groups and landowners in recent years.  You solicit wide support from people who count.

You put the idea out.  You get people talking.  You explain it in reasonable terms.  If you have contact with political people, you work them.  You sell it to them.

And when there is the support, the State Legislature pulls the trigger.

Obviously I, alone, cannot do this.  But I do not think subjugation and surrender are noble, either.  I'm more afraid of what this morphing government in Washington is becoming, than I am of hard work.

[INVAR]

Well, yes.... But the point is, in order to do anything about this, requires a broad consensus over a significant number of people. 

Therein lies the rub.

A vast majority of the people in this land WANT Communism/Fascism/Welfare State Statism and DEMAND that the foundational principles that upheld liberty - be dismantled and destroyed - or at least shoved in a closet and kept to yourself.

We can dream of a balkanized America with state borders keeping out parasites - but that's not going to happen.  Once the shelves go empty you will see just how thin the veneer of civilization is among your own neighbors who live next to you.

Toss in a few demagogues who have already told the population who to blame for every woe everyone already perceives, and when real pain and hunger begin to be felt - well, the quaint ideas of secession to preserve liberty are going to take a huge back seat to simple survival.

And that's not even considering what ISIS, Iran, Russia or China might do.

The curses of Deuteronomy 28 folks.  You are now about to live them. 

Cannot say we were not warned in advance.

[JustPassinThru]

I don't think you even need to call it secession. If a group of governors told the federal government. You are acting outside the authority of the Constitution. We don't need your money and we aren't following you laws and we will forcibly remove any federal agents you send to our state. You would need a good issue(Obamacare, or the Bundy stand off part 1 come to mind) to pull this off. Like the government shut down that didn't cause all of the panic that was expected, the feds would find out they are not as important as they think.

Since the states will never even consider leaving the federal feed trough it's just a pipe dream. The time when men couldn't be bought is long past. You will never get men of integrity elected they just aren't entertaining enough in the outrage and laugh a minute reality TV show that is politics.

In short, we've been had.

You may be right.  It's beyond my power, or yours, to keep people free against their own will.

But I'm half-betting and half-hoping there are some citizens left who value their freedom and see it slipping away.

We cannot force the Bern-Knee supporters to join us.  The Free Excrement Army has their dream, the dream of being fat puppy-dogs in the loving arms of the Federal behemoth.  Nothing we can say will change that.

We may have to move and we may have to eventually take over and occupy a defensible patch of land.  Or, we may just decide it's too much work, and go meekly into the gulag.

[r9etb]

You sell the idea.

You solicit support and gain allies.  As with ANY political movement.

You do NOT pick a small, useless patch and make a stand.  It didn't work for John Brown at Harper's Ferry; it didn't work for various resistance groups and landowners in recent years.  You solicit wide support from people who count.

You put the idea out.  You get people talking.  You explain it in reasonable terms.  If you have contact with political people, you work them.  You sell it to them.

And when there is the support, the State Legislature pulls the trigger.

Obviously I, alone, cannot do this.  But I do not think subjugation and surrender are noble, either.  I'm more afraid of what this morphing government in Washington is becoming, than I am of hard work.

And if you can do all that... you're gonna be in charge, anyway.  So why go the secession route?

[JustPassinThru]

And if you can do all that... you're gonna be in charge, anyway.  So why go the secession route?

You think the States are sovereign today?

Can a state expel illegal immigrants, here in violation of all laws?  NO.

Can a state stop the Federal seizure of resource-rich private or State land?  NO.

Can a state run its own SCHOOLS the way it chooses?  NO.

Can a state cut off welfare cheats using its own laws?  NO.

Can a state require the same identification of voters that the Federal government requires of purchasers of alcohol?  NO.

Can a state allow adults age 18, 19, 20, to BUY alcohol?  NO.

Can a state protect its citizen-residents from confiscatory Federal income and other taxes?  NO.

Why, again, should a state want to Secede, as it is reduced to an impotent administrative arm of Washington?

[INVAR]

You sell the idea.

Well, let's count the cost of this idea and see if anyone else in the country save a tiny inconsequential number are willing to pay it.

You solicit support and gain allies.  As with ANY political movement.

If Conservatism and Christianity itself cannot be sold in this country any longer, and those values and principles are being rejected en-masse by a population that wants a Soviet Union or Nationalist Populism ala Mussolini - why would you think you could sell the idea of secession and armed resistance against a federal leviathan for the sake of individual liberty?

You solicit wide support from people who count.

If this election season is any indication at all, the idea of soliciting wide support for Conservative principles that people would be willing to die for, is already a failed enterprise.

You put the idea out.  You get people talking.  You explain it in reasonable terms.  If you have contact with political people, you work them.  You sell it to them.

And if and when this becomes large enough to garner the attentions of those whom would declare it to be treason - you think for one second anyone is going to be willing to suffer the Waco Treatment that the Beast ail surely employ to make as public an example of you as possible?

And when there is the support, the State Legislature pulls the trigger.

The state legislatures all folded like cheap suits opposing Obamacare's imposition.   You think they are going to risk political lives, favors, life, limb and federal subsidies to tell DC to pound sand?  Let's be realistic here.  NOT.  Gonna.  Happen.

But I do not think subjugation and surrender are noble, either.  I'm more afraid of what this morphing government in Washington is becoming, than I am of hard work.

We have a model to follow that our Founders laid down - except that nowadays, even among Conservatives, the idea of resisting by refusing to comply with tyranny is fast become a useless exercise in futility.

We are no longer a people even among who I thought were likeminded that think our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor are worth the price to pay for liberty when the majority of the country does not want it.

Besides, we cannot have liberty as intended for us, without a vibrant biblical heritage and religion being upheld and practiced among the self-governed.  What folks want now is the equivalent of anarchy - and not ordered liberty that has a foundation in a heritage that most of this people have rejected.

[r9etb]

You think the States are sovereign today?

Can a state expel illegal immigrants, here in violation of all laws?  NO.

Can a state stop the Federal seizure of resource-rich private or State land?  NO.

Can a state run its own SCHOOLS the way it chooses?  NO.

Can a state cut off welfare cheats using its own laws?  NO.

Can a state require the same identification of voters that the Federal government requires of purchasers of alcohol?  NO.

Can a state allow adults age 18, 19, 20, to BUY alcohol?  NO.

Can a state protect its citizen-residents from confiscatory Federal income and other taxes?  NO.

Why, again, should a state want to Secede, as it is reduced to an impotent administrative arm of Washington?

And again: if you can build the broad consensus you require for your secession, don't you already have the means to change all those "NO's" to "YES?"  Secession wouldn't be necessary.

[JustPassinThru]

The state legislatures all folded like cheap suits opposing Obamacare's imposition.   You think they are going to risk political lives, favors, life, limb and federal subsidies to tell DC to pound sand?  Let's be realistic here.  NOT.  Gonna.  Happen.

Not all of them did.  Many of them refused to set up State Exchanges and then sued to stop the extra-legal imposition of Federal/state exchanges in the states that did not.

There's a wide range; everything from Illinois, where the State government is a three-ring circus; to some Western states where they take it very seriously and move with caution.  Who will do what?  I don't know.  I know  what happens if we don't try.  We will eventually become property of our masters in FedGov.

If not enough citizens-turned-subjects value freedom to work to preserve it...that is how it is.  I cannot change that.  We can only try.

And the coming crash may change the minds of many, as well.  Or not...how it shakes out is anyone's guess.

[JustPassinThru]

And again: if you can build the broad consensus you require for your secession, don't you already have the means to change all those "NO's" to "YES?"  Secession wouldn't be necessary.

Have you followed what happened in Arizona, regarding State law which MIRRORED Federal laws, regarding immigration?

The Federal Courts ordered Arizona to stop enforcing State (and by wording, Federal) laws.

Have you followed what happened in Texas?  Federal courts have overturned Texas (and other states') Voter ID laws.

It is not just a matter of states doing something.  THEY ARE STOPPED BY THE FEDERAL LEVIATHAN.

[r9etb]

Have you followed what happened in Arizona, regarding State law which MIRRORED Federal laws, regarding immigration?

The Federal Courts ordered Arizona to stop enforcing State (and by wording, Federal) laws.

Have you followed what happened in Texas?  Federal courts have overturned Texas (and other states') Voter ID laws.

It is not just a matter of states doing something.  THEY ARE STOPPED BY THE FEDERAL LEVIATHAN.

Whatever.  You're really trying hard to miss a pretty obvious point.

[Idaho_Cowboy]

Have you followed what happened in Arizona, regarding State law which MIRRORED Federal laws, regarding immigration?

The Federal Courts ordered Arizona to stop enforcing State (and by wording, Federal) laws.

Have you followed what happened in Texas?  Federal courts have overturned Texas (and other states') Voter ID laws.

It is not just a matter of states doing something.  THEY ARE STOPPED BY THE FEDERAL LEVIATHAN.

"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" -Andrew Jackson.

[JustPassinThru]

Whatever.  You're really trying hard to miss a pretty obvious point.

I am missing your point.

So.  Now that we've established that I'm dumb as a stump...why don't you TELL me what is your point.

[Smokin Joe]

I'm not saying, threaten.  I'm saying DO IT.

In an orderly way.  Why do we want Secession?  To preserve law and order at the local and State levels.  To prevent Federal goons from doing neighborhood searches for guns, gold, stored foodstuffs, young girls, and anything else that would be of interest to them.

Not saying you get twelve of your closest friends to mass up with guns at the state lines.  The STATE LEGISLATURES have to do this.  With, of course, consent of the State citizens - which the State legislature is going to have to solicit.  Or else claim emergency powers to enact Secession.

Obviously it won't work everywhere. 

A lot depends on the Governor of the State. How much? When Virginia finally passed an act of secession, Maryland had been poised to vote on such, but from a strategic standpoint had to wait for Virginia. Had Virginia not seceded and Maryland had, that would not have gone well.

Neither did what happened.

 With the Federal District between the two, Maryland militiamen were told to bring their arms to their armories, leave them, and await the call out by the Governor.

It never came, as the governor was in cahoots with Lincoln.

Maryland was invaded by the state armies (militias) of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
Maryland was a very Southern State, a slave state, and leaned heavily toward secession. That invasion was met with vicious riots, especially in Baltimore, rail lines were pried up and bridges burnt to slow the progress of the Northern troops. The MD state legislature was placed under house arrest at Fort McHenry and not allowed to vote on secession until many terms had expired and the legislators had been replaced with ones more sympathetic to the Federal Forces.

Marylanders went to Virginia and signed up to fight for the Confederacy. Not all, but consider that 4 (four) people voted for Lincoln in the MD County I grew up in. They were, as I have been told, asked to leave. Two had tragic fires. Maryland remained an occupied state through the war.
(The state song makes reference to the Baltimore riots, and was written during the war by an expatriate Marylander in Louisiana.)

A couple of lessons there.

Whoever people would have lead must absolutely be trustworthy. DO NOT TRUST A POLITICIAN.

The Governor of Maryland was not trustworthy, from the standpoint of those Marylanders who would defend their home soil against aggression. John C. Breckinridge had carried the state in the election, and a glance at the election map of 1860 http://www.270towin.com/1860_Election/interactive_map pretty much tells one where sentiments lay, and the Governor's actions ran contrary to those. Had the call-up been in more local hands, a defence might have been mounted.

Some may argue what happened was best, I will not argue that one way or the other. I am providing an historical example of betrayal by political leadership, and to anyone who might find this relevant, it is likely they would be on the side betrayed, as they would be looking at it from the vantage point of a secessionist.

Do not ever leave your kit. Keep your arms and gear where YOU can get them, and not under the control of someone else. Had the Militia been able to meet the invasion, (Their battle rattle was locked away in the armories) the whole conflict may have been much shorter and had a different result.

[JustPassinThru]

"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" -Andrew Jackson.

The Department of inJustice is systematically taking over local police forces, in a number of cities.

Including my own.

However it's happening, there is no longer any meaningful or even passive resistance to the Federal Borg.

[JustPassinThru]

A lot depends on the Governor of the State. How much? When Virginia finally passed an act of secession, Maryland had been poised to vote on such, but from a strategic standpoint had to wait for Virginia. Had Virginia not seceded and Maryland had, that would not have gone well.

Neither did what happened.

 With the Federal District between the two, Maryland militiamen were told to bring their arms to their armories, leave them, and await the call out by the Governor.

It never came, as the governor was in cahoots with Lincoln.

Maryland was invaded by the state armies (militias) of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
Maryland was a very Southern State, a slave state, and leaned heavily toward secession. That invasion was met with vicious riots, especially in Baltimore, rail lines were pried up and bridges burnt to slow the progress of the Northern troops. The MD state legislature was placed under house arrest at Fort McHenry and not allowed to vote on secession until many terms had expired and the legislators had been replaced with ones more sympathetic to the Federal Forces.

Marylanders went to Virginia and signed up to fight for the Confederacy. Not all, but consider that 4 (four) people voted for Lincoln in the MD County I grew up in. They were, as I have been told, asked to leave. Two had tragic fires. Maryland remained an occupied state through the war.
(The state song makes reference to the Baltimore riots, and was written during the war by an expatriate Marylander in Louisiana.)

A couple of lessons there.

Whoever people would have lead must absolutely be trustworthy. DO NOT TRUST A POLITICIAN.

The Governor of Maryland was not trustworthy, from the standpoint of those Marylanders who would defend their home soil against aggression. John C. Breckinridge had carried the state in the election, and a glance at the election map of 1860 http://www.270towin.com/1860_Election/interactive_map pretty much tells one where sentiments lay, and the Governor's actions ran contrary to those. Had the call-up been in more local hands, a defence might have been mounted.

Some may argue what happened was best, I will not argue that one way or the other. I am providing an historical example of betrayal by political leadership, and to anyone who might find this relevant, it is likely they would be on the side betrayed, as they would be looking at it from the vantage point of a secessionist.

Do not ever leave your kit. Keep your arms and gear where YOU can get them, and not under the control of someone else. Had the Militia been able to meet the invasion, (Their battle rattle was locked away in the armories) the whole conflict may have been much shorter and had a different result.

There is always chaos surrounding war.

There as additional chaos with Lincoln's war, as it intentionally miscast and sold as a war of abolition.  In fact it was a war of Federal supremacy over the States.  Had things gone just a little bit differently, and the Slave States controlled (again) Washington, it could have been the Free States being occupied and forced into accepting the legal protection of slavery.

The issue, at core, was that of States' Rights.  And of the right to exit the Union into which they voluntarily joined into.

[don-o]

We have veered off topic here.What does anyone think about seeing if I can preserve secession discussion in a new topic?