|View single post by BradAnderson|
|Posted: Tue May 3rd, 2011 09:44 pm||
There is no evidence that secession was illegal or prohibited by the Constitution, and in fact there is almost overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that secession was a legal, constitutionally sanctioned act.
You're making the mistake of failing to define the Constitution as a national document, vs. international.
This mistake is fatal to your argument, since national republics have the inherent right to maintain their integrity by any means including war. And If you claim that the right of secession is in the Constitution, then you are claiming that it is a national Constitution.
Therefore, you must argue that the Constitution is inter-national, if you want to claim that a right of secession exists at all. Since only an international constitution, can enable states to secede-- but not in the Constitution itself, since then it wouldn't be international if the states powers were limited by it.
The WBtS was over one thing: whether the Constitution was national vs. international; the North claimed it was national, while the South claimed it was international.
Last edited on Tue May 3rd, 2011 09:46 pm by