Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (222445)	10/4/2007 12:37:59 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794349

What I think is appropriate is the preservation of the Union, the most successful political and economic union in human history. The point I'm getting to is that circumstances might someday exist in which government might become so oppressive or incompetent or spendthrift that even folks like you might see casting aside the Union as a viable option. If you get to that point, would you not act simply to preserve the Union or would you act according to the principles established by the Dec. of Independence? Granted, we will likely never get to that point, so the discussion is largely academic. I do think, however, that how we view it to some degree defines how we view our own nexus to this country. If one believes as I do that the principles set forth in the Declaration trump the Constitution because they are a valid expression of one of the basic rights all people should enjoy, namely, to be governed by consent not fiat, then it follows logically that a State, acting peacefully pursuant to the will of the vast majority of its citizens, has the right to secede. The Confederacy failed because it did not act peacefully and because slavery underpinned its claims. I wonder how things might have developed if slavery had not been an issue.