• 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!

Texas secession?

Texas secession?

  • Anytime they want

    Votes: 47 54.7%
  • Bad times only

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • No way

    Votes: 35 40.7%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 3.5%

  • Total voters
    86
Literally ever last sentence out of your mouth is a lie.

John Brown was stopped by the US military.
He was hanged.
His plot was uncovered in literally hours,and stopped within a few days.
And Brown's six abolitionists who funded him didn't know he planned an uprising. He told them in advance funding had to be given "no questions asked." That's why the six were never charged.

Even if they had known, so what? No one should mourn the death of slave owners any more than that of mass murderers and serial rapists, both of which many slave owners were.

If Brown's plot had gone farther and he'd launched a slave uprising, we'd remember him like Toussaint Loverture and Denmark Vesey and Vicente Guererro.
And I'll bet you don't know a single one of those.

Stopped in a few days? What bs have you been reading. John Brown was a murderer already. Supported by the money men 6 of the North. They were aware of his intentions to attack the South. It doesn't matter if they didn't know where. They were accesory to his murders at Harpers Ferry. Accesory to his attack on a 'federal' installation'.

Indeed, John Brown was seen as a heroe by the north as it was. Had he caused the great slave uprising he wanted and massacred the whites in the South, he would have been recieved as a greater hero.

See what the South was dealing with. Treason and hypocrisy. Glory, glory, ...hallelujah.

Quantrill
 
Man, the yankee hates to lose his money. They didn't care if the South went broke in freeing the slaves with no compensation. But now they are so afraid of the 'debt'. What hypocrits. Glory, glory, hallelujah.

Quantrill

Actually the slave owning elites were all about money.

Abolitionists were all about princinple, godliness, and Christian faith.

And antislavery southern whites knew that this war the slave owners started because they were too lazy to work for a living was a rich man's war but a poor man's fight.
 
Actually the slave owning elites were all about money.

Abolitionists were all about princinple, godliness, and Christian faith.

And antislavery southern whites knew that this war the slave owners started because they were too lazy to work for a living was a rich man's war but a poor man's fight.

It's best to not paint one side or the other as righteous in the civil war.
 
The political gulf between Austin and Washington has been growing for decades now.

Washington D.C (aka The Federal Government of the US) has interferred with the States self governance by;:

Stopping Texas from pursuing reforms of the welfare system into a work fare system

Failing to provided adequate and functional border controls

Forcing the State to comply with the racest and sexist policies of the collection of laws know collectively as Affirmative Action

Disallowing Texas to redistrict itself based upon it's own desires and has forced the unpopular redistricting based upon the racest policies of Minority Representation

Directing the State to fund, through it's budgetary processes, items which the State has chosen not to fund

Causing finacial harm and hardships through the actions of the EPA

Taking jobs out of the State based upon the States belief in Right to Work

Funding corporations and supporting market segments in other States that directly compete against existing Companies in Texas that do not receive Federal Tax funding, including segments of the market such as the production of alternative energy, which Texas is the largest creater of

etc, etc

It is very clear that the Federal Government is progressing towards a Political intity that is oppressive to the beliefs and desires of the Poeples of Texas. As there is no treaty between the Republic of Texas and the United States of America surrendering the sovreignty of the Republic of Texas, and that Texas, after accepting the Joint Resolution of Congress of the United States retained it's debt and continued to do business as the Republic of Texas for a time after joining with the United States, then the Republic of Texas has not been truely desolved and that Texas status is that of a Independent but joined sovreign Republic in it's own right and therefore has the inherent right to remove itself from said joining with the United States as it's citizens see fit.

Try again. Texas was never independent to begin with, anymore than Chechnya is today independent of Russia.

And Texas is beomcing a bluer more progressive state all the time. Bush won by 2-1 in 2008 compared to 2012 where the vote was 55-45 for McCain.

Already this generation of Texans have no racial majority anymore, and that will only increase.

The independence nonsense is only favored by the most conservative whites, and only slightly under half of them.

You're demographically on your way out.
 
It's best to not paint one side or the other as righteous in the civil war.

Even with the reality that one side was fighting to preserve the enslavement of a race of people!?!?!?!?!?

Even when the reality is that one side was fighting to destroy the USA?!?!?!?!?!?

Sorry, but most can recognize the good guys in all this and it sure is not the ones fighting to keep their fellow man in chains.
 
The war was won four years before. Any suggestion that it caused the decision four years later is purely wild speculation created by you. I provided you with the decisions as written by Chief Justice Chase. It said not a word about victory being the deciding factor.

"To use the classic summing up phrase of Chief Justice Chase, in the case of Texas vs. White, decided in 1868, the war demonstrated that the United States was 'an indestructible Union of indestructible states.' " (Reconstruction, Robert S. Henry. p. 33)

Quantrill
 
Anyone considering the Independence of Texas should also understand what the Republic of Texas was and the territories it covered.

View attachment 67128378

"Claimed territory" is another way of saying "loyal to Mexico, but the insurgents were too delusional to admit it."

All that claimed territory had to be stolen by invasion.

Even that yellow area was not Texas. It was an "area of sporadic control and ethnic cleansing by the insurgency" as I put on my own map.
https://www.smashwords.com/books/download/158998/1/3212626/the-end-of-texas.pdf

But it was still Mexico, legally, morally, and de facto, until taken by US invasion.
 
The war was won four years before. Any suggestion that it caused the decision four years later is purely wild speculation created by you. I provided you with the decisions as written by Chief Justice Chase. It said not a word about victory being the deciding factor.
Nor did it cite any constitutional prohibition against secession, which means that, per the 10th amendment, the power to secede was reserved to the states.
 
Even with the reality that one side was fighting to preserve the enslavement of a race of people!?!?!?!?!?

Even when the reality is that one side was fighting to destroy the USA?!?!?!?!?!?

Sorry, but most can recognize the good guys in all this and it sure is not the ones fighting to keep their fellow man in chains.

Take the time to learn your history to see how both sides were not the good guys.
 
Admittedly my map is far cruder, but a much more accurate reflection of reality in its labels.


Texas Republic Claims & Reality
Texas Claims.jpg

1. Area of Sporadic Control & Ethnic Cleansing by Anglo-American Proslavery
Insurgency
2. Territory & People Remaining Loyal to Mexico, Claimed by Insurgents But
With No Actual Control Whatsoever.
 
I'm sure in 51 pages this has already been answered, but here's the FAQ's on Texas secession: Texas Secede! FAQ

There's more delusion in there that in your typical UFO or Bigfoot site online.

Start with the two biggest delusions, that Texas was supposedly independent, and that the majority of Texans ever wanted it.
 
Even with the reality that one side was fighting to preserve the enslavement of a race of people!?!?!?!?!?

Even when the reality is that one side was fighting to destroy the USA?!?!?!?!?!?

Sorry, but most can recognize the good guys in all this and it sure is not the ones fighting to keep their fellow man in chains.

Oh, the good guys are those who destroyed the Constitution? Rule by another, higher law? Are traitors? Oh yeah, I recognize em all right.

Quantrill
 
On the other hand, you don't own other people, so should feel no sense of loss when they choose to exercise their right of self government. I get the impression that your bitter lashing out at those who wish to govern themselves is akin to the plantation owner lashing out against "his" people that wished to be free.

You don't own the people of Texas.

Neither do you secesionists. You represent a dying crackpot belief, getting smaller all the time. You represent solely very conservative whites, to the right of Glenn Beck or Pat Buchanan, just barely to the left of David Duke. And many secessionists are outright racists.

Some secessionist groups are outright terrorists. Let's be clear. The so called Republic of Texas militia was and is a terrorist organization as dangerous and extreme as Al Qaeda, but luckily far less competent.

In the past decade the ROT militia tried to kill two presidents, Clinton and GW Bush. They tried to mass murder soldiers at Ft Bliss because they thought they were UN troops. They tried to get hold of anti aircraft missiles and bio weapons.

And their platform calls for the expulsion or execution of anyone they disagree with, liberals, progressices, feminists. If they were to actually get Texas, it'd be a magnet for the worst of the militia movement terrorists, white supremacists, neo Nazis, you name it.

That's why the loyal Americans of Texas, esp minorities, would fight secession tooth and nail.
 
Habit.

Murdering? I thought you called it total war? Oh I get it. Its total war when the yankee does it. Its murder when the Southernor does it.

How does it feel?

Quantrill

Quantrill was despised by the CSA hierarchy, most notably Lee.

Quantrill killed plenty of southerners.

And of course the Union Army had hundreds of thousands of southerners in it, all volunteers.

Unlike the CSA Army, which had a desertion rate three times higher than the US Army during Vietnam.
 
Oh were Americans. Just not yankees. Southernors.

Quantrill

No, you are not. Traitors do not get to call themselves Amerians, certainly not loyal ones. And traitors is what every Confederate, neos too, are.

Except for the many draftees forced into the CSA army of course. Naturally they showed how little they thought of the CSA by deserting.
 
Correction, we are home. Indicating your the one that needs to leave.

Quantrill

Actually, loyal Americans are the majority of Texans, not traitors and secessionists. So we are just fine with visitors to the state.

That was true during the Civil War too. All of south Texas, central Texas, and northeast Texas was loyal Unionist. Blacks, Germans, and Mexicans all were Unionist, along with most poor whites. A few elite plantation owners southwest of Houston did not represent Texas.
 
No, you are not. Traitors do not get to call themselves Amerians, certainly not loyal ones. And traitors is what every Confederate, neos too, are.

Except for the many draftees forced into the CSA army of course. Naturally they showed how little they thought of the CSA by deserting.

Again, you say many things. Jaw is moving. Nothing to support what you say.

Quantrill
 
So an American patriot punishes people when they practice their freedoms? Hmm..

Leaving the country when you have money:

We are going to tax your ass and you can never come back!

Leaving the country when you are a state:

You have to pay out of your nose and give me everything!

You are such a patriot. :roll:

It's not "freedom" when a small groups of secessionists try to take over the state vs the wishes of the majority of loyal Americans.

You don't even have the support of most whites in the state for secession, much less the whole state population. Latinos, Blacks, Natives, all oppose secesion by 90% or more.
 
Neither do you secesionists. You represent a dying crackpot belief, getting smaller all the time.

However, if the constitution means anything, then we have to allow any state to secede. The power to secede was reserved to the states, and the constitution contains no provision that restricts a state from leaving the union. There is simply no constitutional language that forbids a state from leaving.
 
They didn't leave the union because of slavery, but a series of state rights violations that included ending slavery.

Their own Declaration of Causes specifically said they were leaving because of slavery.
 
Their own Declaration of Causes specifically said they were leaving because of slavery.

It was the most recent issue and as such the focus of the DOC.
 
Their own Declaration of Causes specifically said they were leaving because of slavery.

Due to the North's refusal in honoring the protections under the Constitution.

Quantrill
 
It's not "freedom" when a small groups of secessionists try to take over the state vs the wishes of the majority of loyal Americans.

You don't even have the support of most whites in the state for secession, much less the whole state population. Latinos, Blacks, Natives, all oppose secesion by 90% or more.

Why are you trying to split it up into races and why do think I want secession? I'm just saying it legal and is a choice. The states can decide to put it up to a vote and if it loses it doesn't happen. Stop with the drama.
 
Due to the North's refusal in honoring the protections under the Constitution.

Quantrill

In this case, it would have been more important than the constitution, since the constitution was based on certain human rights principals that the constitution itself did not fully honor. So that is actually a good thing.
 
If you want people to be happy you take steps to make them happy. You don't abuse them and make them want to leave and then punish them when they think of doing it to make them think otherwise about it.

Ok, take that to its logical extension.

The pro Union majority of the southern states thus had the right to leave the CSA. That means the CSA has to give up:
Border states
West Virginia
South Texas
Central Texas
Northeast Texas
Creole and Cajun areas of Louisiana
North Alabama
North Arkansas
East Tennessee
Eastern North Carolina
Southeasrt Mississippi
Southwest Georgia
North Georgia

Because all of those areas were overwhelmingly pro Union.
Also, the CSA has to give up every slave.

What are the chances the CSAn would have agreed to this?

For today's Texas secesionists, they have to give up:
South Texas
West Texas panhandle
North Texas panhandle
Austin
German Hill Country (central Texas)
Houston (majority minority city, mostly progressives, just elected an openly lesbian mayor)
Dallas (also majority minority)

So do you think Texas secesionists will agree?

The only real abuse being done is by traitors wanting to shatter the nation.
 
Back
Top Bottom