Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We can sit and argue as to the eventual legal
> status determined by their losing the war, but in
> all reality, if they had won the war we would be
> having a different discussion (obviously).
Victors write the history.
> It is
> still likely slavery would have been abandoned as
> an institution over time, but back then it carried
> such a huge economic impact - not to mention the
> monetary losses incurred, that it was something
> folks were willing to fight for.
>
Possibly, but not before it caused issues in the western states, which could have resulted in three or four weakened countries in what we now know as the U.S.
> I don't support any of what those folks believed
> back then - I merely point out that given enough
> "motivation" from perceived threats, or economic
> issues, it is pretty stupid to say it can't happen
> "just because". It doesn't have to be militias
> that cause the problem either, or make the
> declaration.
>
I'm not saying "just because." I'm saying that there is historic precedent and anyone with half a brain would realize there is more to lose than gain from secession.
. But that doesn't mean it
> "can't happen" - just because. Is it likely? No.
I'm not saying it "can't happen." I'm saying it would be incredibly idiotic to let it happen.
I might also point out that all of the states (and commonwealths) signed onto the Constitution with the understanding that there was no "exit clause" in the Constitution. In the easiest terms, "buyer beware." Maybe the Founding Fathers should have thought of it, but it's too late now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2010 09:13PM by WashingTone-Locian.