wylde007 wrote:Nothing GAVE states rights. The STATES gave the federal government limited authority.
The 9th and 10th Amendments which state quite plainly that all powers not granted to the federal government were reserved to the STATES or the PEOPLE. The Constitution did not restrict the states from doing ANYTHING. It was an instrument to specifically grant and belay certain authorities to the federal government and place limitations on the FEDERAL government.
Since there is absolutely zero language specifically prohibiting member states from leaving the union it is, by default, legal, and for the EXACT SAME REASON that open carry is not legislated in Virginia. If it is not EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED then it is lawful.
South Carolina was lured into firing by ILLEGAL actions of the commander of Moultrie who, under cover of darkness, retreated his post, spiked the guns (S.C. property) and ILLEGALLY occupied sovereign territory of the state of South Carolina. There was already a reinforcement flotilla on its way to resupply and reinforce the ILLEGAL occupation of Sumter.
Private citizens should be able, without government interference, to own ANY AND ALL weapons.
Your perception of the events leading up to the INVASION of the South by the putrid imperial army of history's worst despot and tyrant, Abraham Lincoln, is laughable at best and, at worst, disturbing - in order to agree with you one would have to ignore the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Magna Carta and literally hundreds of years of contract law.
The federal government didn't attack anyone? They attacked a Confederacy of SOVEREIGN states. Contrary to Lincoln's deceitful and treacherous belief that the states were formed from the union, prior to the ratification of the Constitution each and every state was an autonomous, SOVEREIGN entity. Several states even wrote ratification statements qualifying their VOLUNTARY accession to the Constitution stating that they could withdraw at any time and for any reason. Signatures by the other parties acknowledged and consented to those terms.
But let us forget all of that and consider that for even one iota of your factually baseless and, frankly, patently ridiculous version of history to be true then rights do not come from God they are granted by government, thereby severing the concept of self-determination at its roots and resigning it to the realm of government granting itself consent to govern - or, government exists because of government.
That makes me almost physically ill to imagine that a REAL Virginian could think in such terms.
************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
Thanks for your impassioned reply wylde007. I,m going to try and give a fairly brief reply without re-debating the Civil War's chief cause and origins. I doubt that I'm going to change your mind on anything; however, here's a few facts to consider, and a different view.
1. Unlike the Articles of Confederation the Constitution was not ratified by the States. Instead it was ratified by the people through popularly elected State Ratifying Conventions.
2. The Constitution enshrined the principle of Federal Supremacy; whereas, the Articles of Confederation required unanimous approval of the States before the national government could do anything.
3. Looking over Article 1 we find numerous Sections and clauses noting all sorts of specific issues reserved to the Federal Government, none of which require State approval or consent.
4. Technically States did not grant the Federal government anything; however, that's because the States did not ratify the Constitution, instead the people of a state did; which is a significant difference. The Preamble is very specific about this since it begins with "We the People" not we the States.
There is nothing in the Constitution or in the Federalist Papers that suggests the framers were all about creating a union that could be dissolved for any reason, or no reason at all. Such a compact would be no compact at all, and hardly better than the Articles of Confederation. Consequently, and SCOTUS affirmed that view, that the Confederate States were actually in open rebellion. Art 1, Sec 8, Clause 15 gives the Federal Government the authority to suppress insurrections which is exactly what President Lincoln did after South Carolina attacked Federal Forces.
I respect your right to to hold any view of VA and U.S. History you so choose. It would be an issue I suspect for most Virginians if it were the version that is taught in Virginia's elementary, high schools, or colleges. I also know of no history texts in use by VA that characterize President Lincoln, who historians generally recognize as one of, if not our greatest President in such terms. The Lincoln Memorial on the Mall, and his words that are carved into that edifice are all enduring symbols of his greatness, and importance to the United States.
As a Virginian I'm proud of the fact that Virginia did not rush to join the insurrectionist States. Aware of its unique place in the formation of the union, VA was reluctant to secede. As we know, the 1st vote to secede was roundly defeated. The 2nd vote was successful only after hostilities had begun, and that was hardly unanimous since over a third of VA counties voted to remain in the union. Again we all know that most but not all of those counties went on to become West Virginia.
The Civil War, in part thanks to Hollywood, has been overly and wrongly romanticized. There was nothing romantic about a brutal struggle that left hundreds of thousands dead, an untold number wounded and a part of the country pretty much destroyed. How do I celebrate an entity, the Confederacy, whose aim was to prevent the United States from being the nation it is today. How do I celebrate the insurrectionists without denigrating the 350,000 plus Virginians who wanted no part of secession and stayed loyal to the union, or the Virginians who fought to preserve the Union, or the Virginians who were military regulars, who upheld their oath to defend the United States against foreign or domestic enemies. What of the almost half million human beings treated as 3/5s of a person, and nothing more than property.
The best I can say is what General Grant, I think, is alleged to have said: "Never have individuals fought with such bravery and courage in such a wrong headed cause", or words to that effect. I'm confident that sooner or later all Virginians, as most already have, will see the Civil War and its aftermath as the ugly period in United States History that it was. Fortunately historians as each year passes continue to separate the mythology from the reality of the Civil War. A Virginia History textbook of a mere 30 years ago bares scant resemblance to today's history text concerning the Civil War.
I only hope that our esteemed Governor will recognize that he is the elected leader of ALL Virginians if he chooses to issues a Civil War Proclamation next year. Trust me I'm not trying to be argumentative with or dismissive, or condescending to anyone. If it comes across that way I apologize. All I intend is a different view and perspective on what is the usual fare on certain issues.
Gat6
"Democracy without capitalism is socialism, but Capitalism without Democracy is piracy"
