• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Perry opposes Confederate license plates in Texas

they sought to replace the Federal govt. in the South, and they did this.

any suggestion that the Civil War was not a rebellion against Federal authority, is a lie.

"rebel" and, "rebellion", was a post war invention. They didn't start compiling the OR's until 1881.

they kicked out anyone who stayed loyal to the United States of America.

There's where you're wrong. Not lying, but damn sure wrong. (see how that works?)
 
Last edited:
"rebel" and, "rebellion", was a post war invention. They didn't start compiling the OR's until 1881.

that's nice.

The South rebelled against the United States of America, removed all Federal authority, and was a rebellion. Regardless of what your arrogant & ignorant opinion suggests.
 
that's nice.

The South rebelled against the United States of America, removed all Federal authority, and was a rebellion. Regardless of what your arrogant & ignorant opinion suggests.

The Confederates didn't remove all Federal authority. There was still Federal authority outside the 11 Confederate states.
 
that's nice.

The South rebelled against the United States of America, removed all Federal authority, and was a rebellion. Regardless of what your arrogant & ignorant opinion suggests.

The South rebelled no more or less than the United States did. Both declared themselves independent nations and then fought wars against a foreign power. Look at how the Confederacy was treated post war, as a defeated nation. The fact that no southern leader was tried for treason alone shows that the U.S. accepted there was nothing illegal about the secession. The U.S. also allowed each state to re-enter the union, again showing they had accepted the secession as legitimate. As an independent nation, the south cannot have rebelled.
 
The South rebelled no more or less than the United States did....

yes, the Contintental Congress and most of British America rebelled and revolted against British rule. We replaced British rule in most of their colonies in North America, with a domestic government.

It was a rebellion and we are damn proud of it.
 
they removed all Federal authority from the South.

hence, it was a rebellion.

No, they removed themselves from Federal authority. You relly need to take a couple of years and do some extensive research, before getting into these arguments about the Civil War. Not just with me, but with anyone. Obviously, you don't know nearly as much as you think you do about the time period.
 
which was a rebellion, by every logical understanding of the term.

just as the 13 Colonies rebelled against the British Empire.

No, it was not. The fact that they LEGALLY removed themselves from federal authority negates all possibility of a rebellion. if they had just attacked Washington and tried to take over the government while remaining under the banner of the United States, it would have been a rebellion. You can continue spouting revisionist history all you like, it wont make you any more right.
 
The South rebelled no more or less than the United States did. Both declared themselves independent nations and then fought wars against a foreign power. Look at how the Confederacy was treated post war, as a defeated nation. The fact that no southern leader was tried for treason alone shows that the U.S. accepted there was nothing illegal about the secession. The U.S. also allowed each state to re-enter the union, again showing they had accepted the secession as legitimate. As an independent nation, the south cannot have rebelled.

I don't disagree with that, but I think the lack of post war prosecutions had more to do with the fear of another war. Only this time it would a guerilla war that would last twice as long.

There was a lot of sympathy in the north for the southern people, believe it or not; especially after the atrocities that the Federal armies committed during the war and the starvation they caused from destroying crops and strealing food from the civilians.

At Appomattox, Grant was very careful not to do anything that would cause the Confederates to fight their way out and head for the hills. Lee had already made it clear that he had allowed himself to become enveloped at Appamattox on purpose and that he no other intention than to talk and if he didn't dig what Grant had to tell him, the fit was going to hit the shan. Lee also made it clear, that without absolute immunity for his men, the war would go on. After the terms were worked out, the Confederate army, became the only enemy of the United States, in history, that was allowed to stack arms, furl their colors and march away in formation, as an army. Defeated armies of the period weren't allowed that honor.

When the Federal troops cheered, as Lee was leaving the surrender negotiations, Grant said, "I at once sent word, however, to have it stopped. The Confederates were now our countrymen, and we did not want to exult over their downfall."

Lee only surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia. There were still nearly 200,000 Confederate soldiers in the field, under arms. Grant knew that his treatment of Lee and the terms he presented would determine how and if the other Confederate armies surrendered.
 
legally? they seceded in a legal matter?

through which legal process did they secede?

This was covered earlier. there is nothing in the constitution that forbade secession, leaving the decision to do so up to the individual states.
 
This was covered earlier. there is nothing in the constitution that forbade secession, leaving the decision to do so up to the individual states.

There is nothing in the constitution that allowed secession. It is illegal and the govt made sure to end the insurgency.
 
There is nothing in the constitution that allowed secession. It is illegal and the govt made sure to end the insurgency.

do some quick research. the constitution is a limit on FEDERAL powers. anything not SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN in the constitution is left up to the states to decide, according to the constitution (you know, 10th ammendment?) you show me where the constitution forbids secession.
 
The South rebelled no more or less than the United States did. Both declared themselves independent nations and then fought wars against a foreign power. Look at how the Confederacy was treated post war, as a defeated nation. The fact that no southern leader was tried for treason alone shows that the U.S. accepted there was nothing illegal about the secession. The U.S. also allowed each state to re-enter the union, again showing they had accepted the secession as legitimate. As an independent nation, the south cannot have rebelled.

Each state was allowed to enter the union because they never left. The csa was never recognized. It was an insurgency within the US. The south had to agree to certain conditions before it was allowed to vote again like acceptance of the 13th amendment.
 
do some quick research. the constitution is a limit on FEDERAL powers. anything not SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN in the constitution is left up to the states to decide, according to the constitution (you know, 10th ammendment?) you show me where the constitution forbids secession.

Actually it isnt limited on federal powers. Its just a lie that states rights loons like spouting. The founders tried a powerless govt with the articles of confederation and it didnt work. So they made a stronger federal govt.
 
The tenth amendment said that any power not given to the federal government or prohibited to the states by the constitution, was given to the states or the people to decide. what is so difficult about that concept? secession is not forbidden by the constitution, therefore it was left to the states to decide. if you can show me in the constitution where secession is expressly forbidden, i'll be happy to change my mind.
 
The Confederates didn't, "rebel". They seceeded. But, don't worry, I'm not going to confuse you with the facts.
They called themselves "Rebels" but they didn't rebel. That's very interesting.
 
Next week Perry will want to pass a law against texting while driving.
 
The fact is the states cannot secede. Our constitution doesn't allow it. No one in the world recognized the CSA. It was a rebellion. An insurgency in our own country.

Please point out where in the Constitution it says this?

I'll help it does not. A supreme court ruling after the fact said they could not succeed.

History, learn it.

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1869) was a significant case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869. The case involved a claim by the Reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. The state filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court, which, under the United States Constitution, retains original jurisdiction on cases in which a state is a party.

In accepting original jurisdiction, the court ruled that Texas had remained a state ever since it first joined the Union, despite its joining the Confederate States of America and its being under military rule at the time of the decision in the case. In deciding the merits of the bond issue, the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States, and that the ordinances of secession, and all the acts of the legislatures within seceding states intended to give effect to such ordinances, were "absolutely null".


So it looks like judicial activism was alive and well even in 1869, lol.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom