SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: longnshort who wrote (339799)6/8/2007 1:10:53 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) of 1570949
 
Well some believe in States rights. Others want to make some other form of statement, or fit in with a certain sub culture.

Your certainly right that just about no one flying the confederate flag is doing so to signal that they support slavery.

Also I agree with the concept of "state rights" (or more properly, the constitutional limitations imposed on the federal government by the constitution), and an argument can even be made that a state should have the right to secede. But I think you go a bit far saying Lincoln was invading a foreign country. The right to secede isn't obvious in the constitution. And the CSA, even to the extent that it was a country, wasn't totally foreign, it was tied to the US in a very strong way, and the argument that it was still properly part of the US wasn't an argument that is clearly false.

Or to put in another, and perhaps clearer way, even if the right to secession was legitimate, a truly separate foreign country had not yet been achieved. Such separation isn't settled instantly and all at once by the decisions of a state legislature. And a reasonable argument can be made that there is no constitutional right/power of the individual states to unilaterally secede.

As for unprevoked, what about Ft. Sumpter?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext