That's exactly what it means, and all of these states that want to secede would have to do so on a independent bases making it unconstitutional like i said earlier. Btw when they say "consent" of the state they literally mean the USA gives them permission to leave - in other words completely on the union terms more than likely. You just know how the union love losing states (go go civil war). Remember, the states that set up petitions did so separately, and not as a unified body which would kill any legality of seceding. Course with that logic they could probably unify quickly, thus giving them legal leg room. In any case though whether legal or not, the causes that lead to a secession that turns into a civil war is more than likely deemed illegal by one or both sides.
Well, no, the way I read it, if enough states got together, then that would add legitimacy to them seceding, and they could do so without any consent from the feds. Obviously, and as has already happened, this would not be allowed by those who profit from the system that is in place. It is entirely "legal" in the sense that people have the right to change their government, to work to change it. Again, the people in power who profit from the system that is in place are not going to allow it, so it would take war to effect any change, which I doubt the people getting signatures have figured into their attempts to secede. Judicial renderings are always subject to change, depending on who sits on the bench. Look at the recent ruling that now says that corporations are "people" in the sense that they can use their "speech" (which is money according to the court) how they please, which gives them the right to spend money on lobbying how they want to get what they want. This is a complete turnaround, and goes against what the SC has said for some time concerning corporations. Just because some government entity has declared something illegal, does not mean that it is wrong, it just means that they want to control what is going on. The US Constitution specifically states that authority not vested to the federal government is retained by the states, or the people. Given the fact that nothing is said in the Constitution regarding secession tells me that in reality there is nothing illegal about it, since it would have to have been specifically stated as such in that document. Since it is not, the authority rests in the states, if they have nothing that says you cannot change the makeup of the state, then the right rests with the people. It was said that the people spelled out what was in the Const. through their representatives, and so what is in it was considered to have come from the people, that it was the will of the people. As always, the people have the right to effect change in any manner they see fit, regardless of what the law says. But, they must also think about the consequences of trying to change the system. There is one school of thought in libertarianism, an old one, that says that if the people themselves did not sign the Constitution, then it is not binding on them as a legal document. I think it was a lawyer named Lisander Spooner who put that forward, and he was from back in the 1800's or thereabouts. I guess the point I am trying to make is that the people always have the option to make change in this country, regardless of the laws, they just have to go through some serious hoops to do it.
I'm getting tired of hearing liberals say on TV, "If all you red states leave, nobody will miss you." There are liberals in EVERY state, and the states of Virginia and North Carolina are about evenly divided. So, we're sacrificial lambs now? :toetap05:
Secession: are we free to go? Ron Paul... https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=r8RrBCT_NXI
I've seen people like this before--usually they are grabbing their ball and going home because they don't like the fact that they lost. You know---3rd graders.
Maybe those states can elope with Quebec and form a bastard country, the United Provstates of Canmerica.
The percentages are even lower in the other states. These petitions are not very significant. We are a long way from being in a situation where it would be accurate to say that we have any states wanting to leave the union. None of the state governments are getting involved in this movement at all. It's just a few thousand unhappy individuals.
This isn't new. People in the Pacific Northwest have been wanting to form the country of Cascadia for years, and the Sioux Nation has been wanting to gain legal status as well. I just say fuck countries - humanity's worst idea.
The petitions were started by people that no longer want to be a part of the United States of America, so why don't they leave? If you don't want to be a part of the USA then move somewhere else. No one is trying to keep you here.
Because people have a right to change their government if they so desire. It is not about the US, it is about a government that no longer works for the people, it works for special interest groups. The government is not the United States, the people are. I am not a part of any of these movements, by the way, I am, however, very disgusted with the people who purport to be our government, and the apathy of most people in this country.
It doesn't have to be racism, any president is temporary till the next election. Perhaps the Sucsessionists do not want to be on the hook to bailout States like Michigan and California when they go bankrupt Bankruptcy is the kind of absolute truth that eclipses metaphysics quickly.
Because mitt was such a lying fucktard with such awful positions who tried to simply buy the presidency, that if you would not pick obama over him you are probably not ONLY a racist, but a racist with NO understanding of the world, of politics, or of just about anything else.
Denise Rich has recently left The US. And resigned her citizenship. It was over income taxes. The Actor Gerrard Depeardu has left France for Belgium, also over taxes. There are plenty of unhappy people here. Rarely do they leave.
The right wing is quick to tell any "liberals" to leave the US if they don't love it, but when they personally have a beef, they try to destroy the US. Interesting.
Considering the widening political views between the Left and the Right, which is becoming much more than a class division of rich versus poor, many problems might be much more easily solved if the U.S.A. were to reform into 2 separate countries allowing the Left to govern as they wish and the right to do the same. If nothing else it would be extremely interesting to see where people would move from an to, and which would prosper more as a result. Then people could really vote with their feet, which is something a free people should always have available, and would still have if we had stuck to the Constitution as originally intended, prior to many changes made in the early 20th century.