 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Just Testing Ideas
| Joined: | Wed Jul 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 66 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
You say I misuse facts by misspelling sumter as sumpter and calling Texas vs. White, Texas vs. US.
Meanwhile, you twist facts in a US Supreme Court case!
Once and for all lets establish the facts. In the Texas Vs. White decision 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".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White
In this ruling the US Supreme Court looked back to 1861 to say that secession did not occur in 1861 because it was illegal. If the case came to the court in 1861, why would there have been a different decision?
Unilateral secession was a stupid action, firing on ft. sumter compounded this mistake and lead to the unnecessary loss of 750,000 lives. One cannot possibly drink enough “lost cause” Kool-Aid to rationally argue that secession was a wise choice.