• 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
Lokiate said:
Which is covered under the preservation of the Union. The South wanted to split, the Federal Union said no.
Click to expand...

"preservation of the Union"

That phrase doesn't even mean anything legally. Why even use it?
 
Henrin said:
When the south wants to leave and they have the right to do so, yes it is.
Click to expand...

When you can come up with an actual argument, hit me up. I'm not playing this little kiddy **** **** game. I use the phrase, because that's exactly what the Civil War was fought for, to preserve the Union by keeping the United States united.
 
Lokiate said:
When you can come up with an actual argument, hit me up. I'm not playing this little kiddy **** **** game. I use the phrase, because that's exactly what the Civil War was fought for, to preserve the Union by keeping the United States united.
Click to expand...

Union for no other purpose than union is empty and stupid.

Quantrill
 
Lokiate said:
When you can come up with an actual argument, hit me up. I'm not playing this little kiddy **** **** game. I use the phrase, because that's exactly what the Civil War was fought for, to preserve the Union by keeping the United States united.
Click to expand...

Illegally. I guess its better to start a war and kill thousands than to just let a state leave, fail and come back later on their knees.
 
Lokiate said:
Tell that to Lincoln then, because he's the one that made the call.
Click to expand...

He was told. Don't you remember?

Lol, hopefully that is fine to say. D:
 
Quantrill said:
Ariticle 4 sec.2.

And the Dred Scott decision by the Supreme Court.

Quantrill
Click to expand...


The Dred Scott decision is not part of the Constitution. If it protected slavery with that decision, then it invalidated secession in Texas v. White. That court decision is just as valid, and just as much "part of the Constitution." You can't have it both ways. You can't cherry pick the SC decisions you like and disregard the others.

I assume you mean this snippet of the Constitution:

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.
Click to expand...

Does that say that black people are property? Does it say that slavery shall never be made illegal?
 
Lokiate said:
The Confederacy should have thought about that when they used a military force to siege FT Sumter.
Click to expand...

Lol. Back to Fort Sumter. The fort on their territory and their property..

Are you aware that it was told to Lincoln he should NOT fight the south over Fort Sumter?
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Lol. Back to Fort Sumter. The fort on their territory and their property..

Are you aware that it was told to Lincoln he should NOT fight the south over Fort Sumter? That he should talk to them instead?
Click to expand...

The attack on Fort Sumter was a declaration of war.
 
Quantrill said:
No the War between the States was about the abuse of power by the north and the Souths right to secession in order to seek peace and happiness outside of the union.

Quantrill
Click to expand...
No, the South were the aggressors: first by refusing to ratify the Constitution unless it included a protection for slavery but with the understanding that slavery would end in 20 years, second continuing slavery long after it was to end and expanding it to the new states, third by using slavery to undermine the wages of the labor in the North creating an unfair economic advantage, fourth by trying to break up the union with succession and fifth by attacking Fort Sumter.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Lokiate said:
It was an act of war because they waged war against a US Military base. Should we have just let Peal Harbor and 9/11 slide, too?
Click to expand...

Don't be daft. The only reason the North didn't leave the fort is because Lincoln needed an excuse to have his war so he dared the south to attack Fort Sumter by ignoring their request to leave the fort at once. He was told very clearly by his advisers this would lead to war, but since that is what he wanted he ignored his advisers and ordered the men to stay in the fort.
 
Henrin said:
Don't be daft. The only reason the North didn't leave the fort is because Lincoln needed an excuse to have his war so he dared the south to attack Fort Sumter by ignoring their request to leave the fort at once. He was told very clearly by his advisers this would lead to war, but since that is what he wanted he ignored his advisers and ordered the men to stay in the fort.
Click to expand...

The Confederacy knew the consequences, and killed US Soldiers anyway. They brought it upon themselves.
 
Henrin said:
Don't be daft. The only reason the North didn't leave the fort is because Lincoln needed an excuse to have his war so he dared the south to attack Fort Sumter by ignoring their request to leave the fort at once. He was told very clearly by his advisers this would lead to war, but since that is what he wanted he ignored his advisers and ordered the men to stay in the fort.
Click to expand...

This has got to be one of the dumbest things i've ever read on the forum. What is Lincoln supposed to order the US Army to do, just clear the **** out of Fort Sumter and let the South have their secession? The war was fought because one side sought to keep the Union together, while the other sought to divide it in two. Not because Lincoln was scheming for a civil war, but because the South knew that's what it would take to gain their own independence.
 
Lokiate said:
The Confederacy knew the consequences, and killed US Soldiers anyway. They brought it upon themselves.
Click to expand...

When you are ordered to leave property you do not own and you decide to stay you are giving your opponent no choice but to attack and kill you. Lincoln knew what was going to happen by ignoring the order and he still did it.
 
Last edited:
StillBallin75 said:
This has got to be one of the dumbest things i've ever read on the forum. What is Lincoln supposed to order the US Army to do, just clear the **** out of Fort Sumter and let the South have their secession? The war was fought because one side sought to keep the Union together, while the other sought to divide it in two. Not because Lincoln was scheming for a civil war, but because the South knew that's what it would take to gain their own independence.
Click to expand...

1. Leaving the union was NOT illegal.

2. Lincoln was to respect that the fort was not his and the actions by the south were not illegal.

3. He was to therefore leave the fort when ordered to do so.

4. It is a fact that Lincoln needed to make the south look like the aggressor and there is no better way to do it than what he did.
 
Hey how about the ask a Texan thread? see ya'll there.
 
Henrin said:
When you are ordered to leave property you do not own and you decide to stay you are giving your opponent no choice but to attack and kill you. Lincoln knew what was going to happen by ignoring the order and he still did it.
Click to expand...

The Confederate states were, and still are property of the US government
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom