-I cited the 10th amendment
-I noted that there is nothing in the Constitition that prohibits secession.
That's all the evidence necessary to support my claim -- there is NO doubt what the 10th amendment says, just as there is NO doubt that the Constitution contans NO language that prohibits secession
What evidence to the contrary have YOU supplied?
[QUOTE=jallman;1057994199] The Civil War was about state's rights. QUOTE]
Which state rights were being violated exactly?
Your opinion, which means nothing.secession would be a completely over reaction of the sitiutation.
You'll note that this was a parallel, drawn to illustrate how the FSA violated the rights of the southern states.Either way, this is not a good analogy for the debate of sucession.
-There is nothing in the constitution that says it's okay to succede. So we are still at square one if you ask me.
My whole argument is, you don't have one to support this notion of succession.