Arizona to Secede? - Page 6

jillio · 05-24-2010, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

Indoctrination at its finest

You will have to read everything he said rather than what you want to read ....

I am off to bed now ... I will let others enlighten you how you shot yourself in the foot.

I read it. And unlike you, I understood it. It really is a good thing you are going to get some sleep. We can only hope it will improve the distortion in cognitive processes you continue to demonstrate.

BTW...look down. Your foot is bleeding profusely and has been for some time now. I'd bandage that if I were you. Your sheets will be a mess.

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:27 AM

a screenwriter wrote a letter to 9 Supreme Court judges to ask a hypothetical question about state secession.

Quote:

I’m a screenwriter in New York City, and am writing to see if you might be willing to assist me in a project that involves a unique constitutional issue.
My latest screenplay is a comedy about Maine seceding from the United States and joining Canada. There are parts of the story that deal with the legality of such an event and, of course, a big showdown in the Supreme Court is part of the story.

At the moment my story is a 12 page treatment. As an architect turned screenwriter, it is fair to say that I come up a bit short in the art of Supreme Court advocacy. If you could spare a few moments on a serious subject that is treated in a comedic way, I would greatly appreciate your thoughts. I’m sure you’ll find the story very entertaining.

and Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia replied back -

Quote:

I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, “one Nation, indivisible.”) Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

I am sure that poetic license can overcome all that — but you do not need legal advice for that. Good luck with your screenplay.

so good luck with your attempt to secede from USA

jillio · 05-24-2010, 05:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

she doesn't have a gun

I've got better aim!

jillio · 05-24-2010, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

a screenwriter wrote a letter to 9 Supreme Court judges to ask a hypothetical question about state secession.

and Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia replied back -

so good luck with your attempt to secede from USA

Great one! But I doubt he'll believe it there either. He doesn't even understand when his own quotes are telling him he's wrong.

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Great one! But I doubt he'll believe it there either. He doesn't even understand when his own quotes are telling him he's wrong.

love that little humor that Justice Scalia wrote - "I am sure that poetic license can overcome all that — but you do not need legal advice for that."

Got a good chuckle out of that.

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I read it. And unlike you, I understood it. It really is a good thing you are going to get some sleep. We can only hope it will improve the distortion in cognitive processes you continue to demonstrate.

BTW...look down. Your foot is bleeding profusely and has been for some time now. I'd bandage that if I were you. Your sheets will be a mess.

Here, let me take you by your hand and explain what you missed and "thought" you understood.

again.....

Quote:

As I will explain below, it is settled law that the Constitution does not permit unilateral secession: A state or group of states cannot simply leave the Union over the objections of the national government. However, the arguments that led to this settled understanding are hardly unassailable, and the Constitution is probably best read as permitting the mutually agreed upon departure of one or more states. <<<<< That right there means ... wow! secession!

ah! permitting secession .... hmmmmm

My foot is absolutely terrific. . save those bandages for yourself.

Now, if I have to define "permitting" ... I will be happy to explain, in nitty gritty detail .. what this man said.

Apparently, it is beyond your level of comprehension as you have demonstrated time after time.

Quote:

Main Entry: se·ces·sion
Pronunciation: \si-ˈse-shən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin secession-, secessio, from secedere
Date: 1604

1 : withdrawal into privacy or solitude : retirement
2 : formal withdrawal from an organization

Quote:

withdrawal

4 a : the act of drawing someone or something back from or out of a place or position

Quote:

de·par·ture (dĭ-pärˈchər)
noun

1. The act of leaving.

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 05:34 AM

Yes, the Democrats have been championing Scalia for some time ....

over this very issue - do Americans have the "right" to disagree now, or do we live in a police state?

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

Yes, the Democrats have been championing Scalia for some time ....

?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

over this very issue - do Americans have the "right" to disagree now, or do we live in a police state?

?

why aren't you in bed yet?

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 05:37 AM

why aren't you?

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 05:41 AM

Quote:

What is alarming about his response is Scalia's insisting that the issue was settled by the so-called "Civil War". Of course, the Constitution itself must be the authority--not the Court and definelty not a war. If went to war over the freedom of the press and those who seek to do away with free press proved the victor, surely we would not exclaim, "There is no right to a free press. The free pressers lost the war." Such a reliance on victory in war is outrageously absurd. Might does not thwart the rule of law. That is tyranny of the majority, which is just as vile a despotism as tyranny of a single agent.

In Defense of the Constitution: Scalia and Secession

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

why aren't you?

I already did. That's why I'm lucid

when you go to sleep, let your subconscious mind ponder on why the founding fathers have never made a clear language on secession issue.

Here's a little hint - because they never envisioned the thought that "United States of America" would dissolve and be divided. They believed in unison, not disunity... hence - the US Constitution. Declaration of Independence. If we let secession happen, then we are no different from USSR.

So are you a communist?

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

In Defense of the Constitution: Scalia and Secession

what about it? Tell me in your own word so I can see you understand it or not.

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

I already did. That's why I'm lucid

when you go to sleep, let your subconscious mind ponder on why the founding fathers have never made a clear language on secession issue.

Here's a little hint - because they never envisioned the thought that "United States of America" would dissolve and be divided. They believed in unison, not disunity... hence - the US Constitution. Declaration of Independence. If we let secession happen, then we are no different from USSR.

So are you a communist?

Actually, you need to reassess your evaluation. The founding fathers addressed this very issue ... after all, didn't they just fight a war against an oppressive government?

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

Actually, you need to reassess your evaluation. The founding fathers addressed this very issue ... after all, didn't they just fight a war against an oppressive government?

who? the British?

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 05:50 AM

you do realize that if you keep spouting about "Founding Fathers" and "Constitution"... you are referring to the United States of America.... not an individual state.

I'm sorry but you cannot just secede from USA and then copy the US Constitution, American history, etc. as State Constitution. That is unpatriotic and un-American.

when you secede from USA,
You no longer identify yourself as American.
You no longer share American value.
You no longer share with the heritage (the first family generation in America).
You no longer share with American history.
You no longer extend respect for our men and women in uniform who are fighting for America

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

you do realize that if you keep spouting about "Founding Fathers" and "Constitution"... you are referring to the United States of America.... not an individual state.

I'm sorry but you cannot just secede from USA and then copy the US Constitution, American history, etc. as State Constitution. That is unpatriotic and un-American.

when you secede from USA,
You no longer identify yourself as American.
You no longer share American value.
You no longer share with the heritage (the first family generation in America).
You no longer share with American history.
You no longer extend respect for our men and women in uniform who are fighting for America

Re-read my post above, I broke down what the Constitutional Scholar said .... in nitty, gritty detail. I can even draw pictures and make it a coloring book.

He said that states are permitted to secede. Constitutionally too ...

Still feeling like posting silly pictures?

I am too tired ... yawn till later man.

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

Re-read my post above, I broke down what the Constitutional Scholar said .... in nitty, gritty detail. I can even draw pictures and make it a coloring book.

He said that states are permitted to secede. Constitutionally too ...

Still feeling like posting silly pictures?

I am too tired ... yawn till later man.

No. No. No.

his coloring book does not match with your coloring book anyway

Steinhauer · 05-24-2010, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

No. No. No.

his coloring book does not match with your coloring book anyway

ok ... just when I thought I was out .... the disillusioned one drags me back in (I am kidding)

You got to ask your questions and state your points. I listened to what you were saying between the rhetoric; now let me ask you one.

If the Federal Government imposed restrictions on individual liberty, should states just go along with it?

and yes. YES .... YES

States have the right to secede.

or rather ... depart

or rather...

withdraw

So says the expert Constitutional Scholar.

But then again, our founding fathers should have just gone along with British control of the colonies ... things would be much different if they did (being sarcastic).

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steinhauer

ok ... just when I thought I was out .... the disillusioned one drags me back in (I am kidding)

You got to ask your questions and state your points. I listened to what you were saying between the rhetoric; now let me ask you one.

If the Federal Government imposed restrictions on individual liberty, should states just go along with it?

and yes. YES .... YES

States have the right to secede.

or rather ... depart

or rather...

withdraw

So says the expert Constitutional Scholar.

But then again, our founding fathers should have just gone along with British control of the colonies ... things would be much different if they did (being sarcastic).

not again... another silly hypothetical question? the answer is no Federal Government would not impose restrictions on individual liberty. if it did - it would be ruled as unconstitutional at later date... hence Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act. hence President Reagan's letter regarding internment of American citizens. hence DC gun ban.

btw - see my post #148. How's that Supreme Court word over Constitution scholar?

yizuman · 05-24-2010, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Texas gave up their right to sucede. Check the archives. They signed it away. Bye, bye, now. Gone. Can't claim the right no more.

Says you, they never did such a thing.

In other words, prove it. In documentation, not some website that says so.

Yiz

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yizuman

Says you, they never did such a thing.

In other words, prove it. In documentation, not some website that says so.

Yiz

prove it? the original document with signature's probably at museum right now.

**Foxrac** · 05-24-2010, 08:54 AM

ZERO of states can secede from USA, period.

yizuman · 05-24-2010, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

a screenwriter wrote a letter to 9 Supreme Court judges to ask a hypothetical question about state secession.

and Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia replied back -

so good luck with your attempt to secede from USA

They're just words from Judges, they did not provide any documentations to back it up. It's just a letter response that I just see.

Yiz

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yizuman

They're just words from Judges, they did not provide any documentations to back it up. It's just a letter response that I just see.

Yiz

you do realize that the "words" from US Supreme Court Judges pretty much determines the fate of America? and determines the interpretation of the Constitution? You do realize that this is the judicial branch?

yizuman · 05-24-2010, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

prove it? the original document with signature's probably at museum right now.

Well if that's the case, a copy of it would be online, just a copy of the United States Constitution is online. So where is the documentations that backs up what the Judge says?

Yiz

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yizuman

Well if that's the case, a copy of it would be online, just a copy of the United States Constitution is online. So where is the documentations that backs up what the Judge says?

Yiz

here - An Ordinance, Declaring the Ordinance of Secession Null and Void March 15, 1866

Quote:

Be it ordained by the people of Texas in Convention assembled, That we acknowledge the supremacy of the Constitution of the United States, and the laws passed in pursuance thereof; and that an Ordinance adopted by a former Convention of the people of Texas on the 1st day of February, A.D. 1861, entitled "An Ordinance to Dissolve the Union between the State of Texas and the other States, united under the compact styled 'Constitution of the United States of America,'" be and the same is hereby declared null and void; and the right heretofore claimed by the State of Texas to secede from the Union, is hereby distinctly renounced. Passed 15th March, 1866.

SOURCE:
The Constitution of the State of Texas, as Amended by the Delegates in Convention Assembled, Austin, 1866. Austin: Printed at the Southern Intelligencer Office, 1866, p. 32.

Narrative History of Texas Annexation

Quote:

Texans voted in favor of annexation to the United States in the first election following independence in 1836. However, throughout the Republic period (1836-1845) no treaty of annexation negotiated between the Republic and the United States was ratified by both nations.

When all attempts to arrive at a formal annexation treaty failed, the United States Congress passed--after much debate and only a simple majority--a Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States. Under these terms, Texas would keep both its public lands and its public debt, it would have the power to divide into four additional states "of convenient size" in the future if it so desired, and it would deliver all military, postal, and customs facilities and authority to the United States government. (Neither this joint resolution or the ordinance passed by the Republic of Texas' Annexation Convention gave Texas the right to secede.)

In July 1845, a popularly-elected Constitutional Convention met in Austin to consider both this annexation proposal as well as a proposed peace treaty with Mexico which would end the state of war between the two nations, but only if Texas remained an independent country.

The Convention voted to accept the United States' proposal, and the Annexation Ordinance was submitted to a popular vote in October 1845. The proposed Annexation Ordinance and State Constitution were approved by the Texas voters and submitted to the United States Congress.

The United States House and Senate, in turn, accepted the Texas state constitution in a Joint Resolution to Admit Texas as a State which was signed by the president on December 29, 1845. Although the formal transfer of government did not occur until February 19, 1846, Texas statehood dates from the 29th of December.

Opposition to Texas' admission to the United States was particularly strong in the North during this period. If a challenge to the constitutionality of the move could have been made successfully at that time, there is little doubt that the leaders of the opposition would have instituted such a suit in the Supreme Court.

Narrative by Jean Carefoot
Texas State Library and Archives Commission April 1997

Conclusion - it supported Jillio's statement below

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Texas gave up their right to sucede. Check the archives. They signed it away. Bye, bye, now. Gone. Can't claim the right no more.

Any more question?

yizuman · 05-24-2010, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiro

you do realize that the "words" from US Supreme Court Judges pretty much determines the fate of America? and determines the interpretation of the Constitution? You do realize that this is the judicial branch?

A Judge is not above the law nor the Constitution. If what you're saying is true, that tantamounts to Dictatorship or Tyranny. The Government is supposed to be for the people, not the people for the Government.

Yiz

**Jiro** · 05-24-2010, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yizuman

A Judge is not above the law nor the Constitution. If what you're saying is true, that tantamounts to Dictatorship or Tyranny. The Government is supposed to be for the people, not the people for the Government.

Yiz

uh............................ I'm going to give you a chance to redeem yourself. Think very hard about what you just said there.

souggy · 05-24-2010, 09:38 AM

Wirelessly posted

I think people are misunderstanding why the United States broke ties with the British.

yizuman · 05-24-2010, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by souggy

Wirelessly posted

I think people are misunderstanding why the United States broke ties with the British.

Exactly, otherwise we'd still be under British rule under the thumb of a King and his donkey.

(Queen actually, but speaking in future terms, hint: Charles and his donkey "tabloid term for his current wife")

Yiz

05-24-2010, 05:50 AM	#165 (permalink)
Jiro Aparecium Deletrius Legil Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: The Soprano State Posts: 61,226	you do realize that if you keep spouting about "Founding Fathers" and "Constitution"... you are referring to the United States of America.... not an individual state. I'm sorry but you cannot just secede from USA and then copy the US Constitution, American history, etc. as State Constitution. That is unpatriotic and un-American. when you secede from USA, You no longer identify yourself as American. You no longer share American value. You no longer share with the heritage (the first family generation in America). You no longer share with American history. You no longer extend respect for our men and women in uniform who are fighting for America __________________ - Don't forget to buy Jiro's Special Edition Sunglasses for $19.95

05-24-2010, 08:54 AM	#172 (permalink)
Foxrac Need Stormtroopers? Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Zaphias Posts: 33,215	ZERO of states can secede from USA, period. __________________ In Moto We Trust

05-24-2010, 09:38 AM	#179 (permalink)
souggy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 9,541	Wirelessly posted I think people are misunderstanding why the United States broke ties with the British. __________________ "It is my task to convince you not to turn away because you don’t understand it." - Richard Freynman

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

05-24-2010, 05:34 AM	#157 (permalink)
Steinhauer Registered User Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 8,191 Blog Entries: 1	Yes, the Democrats have been championing Scalia for some time .... over this very issue - do Americans have the "right" to disagree now, or do we live in a police state?

05-24-2010, 05:37 AM	#159 (permalink)
Steinhauer Registered User Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 8,191 Blog Entries: 1	why aren't you?