Quote:It won't be a catastrophic event but a slow bleed that leads to a post soviet style reorganization. 30 years ago it would've lead to smaller more regional governments like the Soviet Union breaking into multiple nations. Today In this environment failed nation states are absorbed into a global state, that's our future the North American union for better or as I fear much worse.
It won't be them coming for the guns like you said it'll be the complete dissolving of national borders, culture and individuality for the greater good to stabilize the continent.
Call me paranoid but ask yourself would anyone 30 years ago believed we'd have the massive police state we have today combined with the dissolution of any national boarders and the trillions of national debt only being held up under inflation?
Ever been out of the country, Eric?
Quote:Ever been out of the country, Eric?
Yes I have South America to be specific.
Quote:Yes I have South America to be specific.
That's not very specific at all >_>
Quote:That's not very specific at all >_>
Fine Peru I couldn't spell the name of the two cities we spent time in to save my life.
Quote:Fine Peru I couldn't spell the name of the two cities we spent time in to save my life.
Why did you go to Peru?
Quote:Why did you go to Peru?
Spent 2 weeks helping build a church in Peru. We where in two different cities mostly but spent a couple of days in the outer areas in a kitchen soup helping them out as well.
I haven't been but my Father has also helped build churches in Columbia, Venezuela, Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina several times. He's also been to Hatti a handful of times.
Back on topic, all those who espouse secession should be tried for treason. Punishment should range from censure to execution.
Quote:Back on topic, all those who espouse secession should be tried for treason. Punishment should range from censure to execution.
Great Britain would be proud.
Quote:Great Britain would be proud.
Treason is on the books of this country, what's the problem with enforcing it?
Quote:Treason is on the books of this country, what's the problem with enforcing it?
There's a multitude of things on the books, that doesn't change the morality of the subject. You want to execute individuals that look to peacefully dissolve their association with the Federal Government?
Should we start rounding up the hippies in Colorado for execution, since they've seceded from Federal Laws in regards to marijuana? When did the Federal Government become the only legitimate form of government?
I guess the bottom line is the age old question, are we a society that is mutually beneficial and compromised of States voluntarily working towards a better Union, or are we a society built on the Union dictating to States and Individuals legislation regardless of their desire to participate?
If it's the later I want no part of it.
So what should the requirements be for seceding from the union?
A 50.01% vote? That'd suck for the people who didn't want to secede. 51%? That'd still be nearly half that didn't want to secede. Even if it's 60/40 that's 40% of the population that would be upset about changing their country by the process of voting.
"Well if they don't like it, they can move!" That's actually great advice for those in favor of secession. Don't like it? You're also free to secede.
Alternately the suggestion might be that only those who voted to secede would have seceded. With promises like: "If you like your country, you can keep your country"
Quote:There's a multitude of things on the books, that doesn't change the morality of the subject. You want to execute individuals that look to peacefully dissolve their association with the Federal Government?
Should we start rounding up the hippies in Colorado for execution, since they've seceded from Federal Laws in regards to marijuana? When did the Federal Government become the only legitimate form of government?
I guess the bottom line is the age old question, are we a society that is mutually beneficial and compromised of States voluntarily working towards a better Union, or are we a society built on the Union dictating to States and Individuals legislation regardless of their desire to participate?
If it's the later I want no part of it.
I didn't say that, I said there was a range of punishments. Why do you always try to change my arguments? And if you want to dissolve your relationship, the way to do that is to renounce your citizenship and leave, the government rarely stops people from doing that.
We are an indissoluble Union of Free States, but since 1865 your question has been answered and Federalism lost. That means you don't get to pick and choose what you do or don't participate in, though it appears that the Feds under this group will pick and choose what they enforce. That doesn't mean that the next Admin won't change their position and start enforcement, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. We're through the Looking Glass and the Federal Government trumps all.
Quote:So what should the requirements be for seceding from the union?
A 50.01% vote? That'd suck for the people who didn't want to secede. 51%? That'd still be nearly half that didn't want to secede. Even if it's 60/40 that's 40% of the population that would be upset about changing their country by the process of voting.
"Well if they don't like it, they can move!" That's actually great advice for those in favor of secession. Don't like it? You're also free to secede.
Alternately the suggestion might be that only those who voted to secede would have seceded. With promises like: "If you like your country, you can keep your country"
There's a process but it's way more complicated than an up or down yes or no vote. It's not something to be taken lightly but like everything else in the world, there's a time and season.
Quote:I didn't say that, I said there was a range of punishments. Why do you always try to change my arguments? And if you want to dissolve your relationship, the way to do that is to renounce your citizenship and leave, the government rarely stops people from doing that.
We are an indissoluble Union of Free States, but since 1865 your question has been answered and Federalism lost. That means you don't get to pick and choose what you do or don't participate in, though it appears that the Feds under this group will pick and choose what they enforce. That doesn't mean that the next Admin won't change their position and start enforcement, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. We're through the Looking Glass and the Federal Government trumps all.
You said to execution, I'm not changing your argument I'm trying to grasp the reality you really believe people discussing the possibility of dissolving ties with a government should be punished up to execution.
The notion the Federal Government trumps all is being challenged at every turn, if you can't see that I don't know what to tell you. The reality is the Federal Government DOES NOT trump all, they never have constitutionally. They've attempted to set those precedents but it's being challenged and over turned left and right.
Quote:There's a process but it's way more complicated than an up or down yes or no vote. It's not something to be taken lightly but like everything else in the world, there's a time and season.
You said to execution, I'm not changing your argument I'm trying to grasp the reality you really believe people discussing the possibility of dissolving ties with a government should be punished up to execution.
The notion the Federal Government trumps all is being challenged at every turn, if you can't see that I don't know what to tell you. The reality is the Federal Government DOES NOT trump all, they never have constitutionally. They've attempted to set those precedents but it's being challenged and over turned left and right.
I'm trying to grasp you thinking that "talking" about it is what I meant by punishment by execution. And if you really believe that the Feds are challenged, I offer you ACA as exhibit 1, you know, the one where the "conservative" Supreme Court did a circus act to permit the legislation. You need to wake up to reality friend, the world that you and I want can't and won't ever exist no matter how much you agitate for it. Just drink the Kool Aid and come to the dark side. We have Global Warming, Higher Taxes, Loose Borders, Gun Control,s and Government Cheese for all!
Quote:I'm trying to grasp you thinking that "talking" about it is what I meant by punishment by execution. And if you really believe that the Feds are challenged, I offer you ACA as exhibit 1, you know, the one where the "conservative" Supreme Court did a circus act to permit the legislation. You need to wake up to reality friend, the world that you and I want can't and won't ever exist no matter how much you agitate for it. Just drink the Kool Aid and come to the dark side. We have Global Warming, Higher Taxes, Loose Borders, Gun Control,s and Government Cheese for all!
I for one refuse to accept federalized central power, I'll agitate until I have no breath left to agitate with.
The 10th Amendment should be enough to display the Feds are not the final authority.
Quote:I for one refuse to accept federalized central power, I'll agitate until I have no breath left to agitate with.
The 10th Amendment should be enough to display the Feds are not the final authority.
“We have a great opportunity… to really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations,” - BHO, 03/02/15
“We can expand the [federally-funded]
COPS program… to see if we can get more incentives for local communities to apply some of the best practices and lessons that are embodied in this report,” - BHO 03/02/15
Translation: If local law enforcement doesn't comply with our federal guidelines for police activities then we'll cut off the funding teat. Just like schools and "common core" curricula.
They're coming for local law enforcement next. The dark fingers of the Feds are into literally everything and nothing will stop it, especially not a piece of paper that's open to interpretation by the very government that it was supposed to contain.
I'm not disagreeing they're trying to assert the fed as the final authority, I'm simply disagreeing they are correct.
To me secession is as natural as amending the constitution. Free and independent states entered a union, if the time ever comes that union is no longer beneficial to a state and they chose to leave I would support their decision. I don't expect it to happen, I don't hope for it to happen, I do however see it as a viable option.
1. Ignoring a federal law is not an act of secession.
2. There are done agencies and bureaucracies that can be argued to be cumbersome, but the federal government was created based on the constitution. I for one think the DHD and NSA need to be reigned in. Besides those, what other federal agencies are impeding citizen's rights?
I'm just curious as to why someone would want to break apart the nation just because they don't like certain laws. The US has a way to fix these issues, it's called voting
Quote:I'm not disagreeing they're trying to assert the fed as the final authority, I'm simply disagreeing they are correct.
To me secession is as natural as amending the constitution. Free and independent states entered a union, if the time ever comes that union is no longer beneficial to a state and they chose to leave I would support their decision. I don't expect it to happen, I don't hope for it to happen, I do however see it as a viable option.
I like you, I like you passion and your takes but I don't believe you here. I think it's exactly what you want.
Quote:1. Ignoring a federal law is not an act of secession.
2. There are done agencies and bureaucracies that can be argued to be cumbersome, but the federal government was created based on the constitution. I for one think the DHD and NSA need to be reigned in. Besides those, what other federal agencies are impeding citizen's rights?
I'm just curious as to why someone would want to break apart the nation just because they don't like certain laws. The US has a way to fix these issues, it's called voting
Exactly, in the MJ example, it's literally in accordance with the state's rights arguments libertarians espouse. Those right's are entrenched in the constitution. Secession is not. Someone correct me if I am wrong.