• 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!

Should states have the right to secede?

Secession from the USA


  • Total voters
    33

BDBoop

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
9,800
Reaction score
2,719
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
It hardly feels like a Union anymore. Should states be able to take a vote and secede if they wish? Why or why not?
 
It hardly feels like a Union anymore. Should states be able to take a vote and secede if they wish? Why or why not?

I believe the original contract between the states allowed them to leave if they wanted. Its stupid IMHO to do so but lots of things are stupid but the right to be stupid exists
 
It will never happen again, but I support the option.
 
It would be far more practical for a state like Florida, Hawaii, Texas or Kalifornia than say Ohio or Kansas to do so given borders and the fact that lots of people in Ohio work in Michigan, Indiana, WVa, Northern Ky, and Pennsylvania. Passports to work at the Lexus dealership a mile outside Ohio?
 
Yeah, would be interesting. One of my borders is Canada so. I guess we have a head start. ;)
 
The Republic of Texas will rise again.

13189_1178_1_lg.jpg


mapRepofTexas1836.gif
 
Last edited:
Depends on the circumstances. If a state wanted to secede so that it could abuse human rights more freely (as was the case during the US Civil War), then I wouldn't support it. But if they had some legitimate political grievance or philosophical difference of opinion with the federal government, I'd probably go along with it. I think it would need to be a drawn-out process lasting several years though...a simple declaration of independence by the state government (or a 51% referendum) would be insufficient IMO.

Maybe if the state government voted to pursue independence, and the state's residents voted for independence by a two-thirds majority on two separate occasions a few years apart. That seems like a reasonable standard for so important of an issue.
 
Last edited:
States do have the right to secede, if all the other states agree, or if they can hold their own militarily.
 
I'm sorry but I believe this Union is sacred, holy. Succession would've utterly destroyed America had it been allowed before, never again.
 
States do have the right to secede, if all the other states agree, or if they can hold their own militarily.

Then that would be a 'no', because you know the other states won't agree.
 
The united States is a union of willing members. States should be able to leave the union if they feel the partnership is no longer in their interests.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why people still cling to the compact theory. Its validity died out with the Confederacy. The United States of America are and shall remain undivided. What's that saying divide and conquer? Well, if we divide, we'll easily be conquered.

If there are grievances or differences, they can be resolved; thats the entire purpose of the USA as it is. To compromise, and progress towards a more perfect Union.
 
Its my opinion that if a state wished to a succeed it probably wouldn't be a single state doing so, especially considering how more interconnected we are today than during the Civil War, it would have to be a bloc of states. And if that was the case than clearly our political process and perhaps our system of government and perhaps even our\ Constitution has failed, in which case its time to do exactly what the Founding Fathers wished us to do, toss it all out and start over with something new. Of course that would have to be an ordered process as well, changing our system of gov't would mean massive problems for the US simply from the rest of the world's opinion of us, remember how economically interconnected we all are, not to mention the domestic issues. For it to be changed my preferred method would be another Constitutional Congress, not another civil war.
 
I don't understand why people still cling to the compact theory. Its validity died out with the Confederacy. The United States of America are and shall remain undivided. What's that saying divide and conquer? Well, if we divide, we'll easily be conquered.

If there are grievances or differences, they can be resolved; thats the entire purpose of the USA as it is. To compromise, and progress towards a more perfect Union.


Forcing unwillingly members to stay in your union won't lead to a more perfect union. Instead it will lead to a broken union.
 
It hardly feels like a Union anymore. Should states be able to take a vote and secede if they wish? Why or why not?
No.
According to Texas Governor and possible GOP Presidential candidate Rick Perry they should.:thumbdown
 
It hardly feels like a Union anymore. Should states be able to take a vote and secede if they wish? Why or why not?

yes, states should have the right to secede.

it should be passed by a state referendum. and then approved by 2/3rds of the other state's legislatures.
 
Forcing unwillingly members to stay in your union won't lead to a more perfect union. Instead it will lead to a broken union.

So you would have let America split into two halfs had you been in Lincoln's shoes? That's exactly what you're saying is the right thing to do.

Yes, you force them to stay part of the union, even if it requires blood. If they aren't willing to compromise now, force them to compromise later. That's all there is to it.
 
the Southern States did not seek the approval of the other states to secede.

maybe they would have received it. but no, they simply decided to declare independence and attack Fort Sumter without provocation.

nice.
 
Didn't we settle this issue last century?
 
Didn't we settle this issue last century?

Well, actually it was the Century before the last Century (it's now the 21st Century), but essentially yes. Little thing called the "Civil War." Kind of important in history...

I used to think that states should be able to secede. Then somebody pointed out to me that if anyone can leave the Union anytime they get a little miffed, it's not much of a Union is it?
 
So you would have let America split into two halfs had you been in Lincoln's shoes? That's exactly what you're saying is the right thing to do.

Yes, you force them to stay part of the union, even if it requires blood. If they aren't willing to compromise now, force them to compromise later. That's all there is to it.

James Buchanan did that. Largely seen as the worst President ever. Mostly because he was impotent when it came to using the power of his office. (Though I bet his boyfriend would tell you he wasn't impotent).
 
So you would have let America split into two halfs had you been in Lincoln's shoes? That's exactly what you're saying is the right thing to do.

Yes, I would have.

Yes, you force them to stay part of the union, even if it requires blood. If they aren't willing to compromise now, force them to compromise later. That's all there is to it.

Has the south ever actually came to your side yet? The answer is a astounding no. The further you force them to do as you wish the further they get from their thoughts on their state and the further the separation becomes. One the things people forget is this is why state rights are so important. Without them states are forced to be do a great deal of things they have no desire to do and become unwilling members of the union.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom