Texas Secession

Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Texas Secession

The following is a little long, so bear with me. It's is a short exchange of e-mails between myself and some guy speaking for www.texassecede.com.

 

MY FIRST E-MAIL -

What the Holy Bible says about secession -

"Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin." - Isaiah 30:1

"For rebellion as is the sin of witchcraft." - 1 Samuel 15:23

(The New Testament gives clear instructions to Christians on how to behave when ruled under a monarchy.)

"For the Lord's sake accept the authority of every human institution, whether of the emperor as supreme, or of governors, as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right." - 1 Peter 2:13

"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resist authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment." - Romans 13:1

The Judeo-Christian God of the Holy Bible clearly hates rebellion. Satan lead a rebellion against God and the two have been fighting a Civil War since.


HIS RESPONSE -

Unless you condemn July 4th as a celebration of godless rebellion, and
condemn the American colonists in general, and the signers of the
Declaration of Independence in particular, as godless rebels for
seceding from the British empire, then you're just another Bible-
beating hypocrite who uses Scripture to tell thers what to do, but
disregards it whenever it's "inconvenient."


MY RESPONSE -

Actually, I am a Christian turned Agonistic-Atheist. However, it seems literally every person I have come across that supports what you're doing is highly religious, as are many people who are sympathetic to the old Confederacy and yet they do not even know their own bible and what it says about what they are doing. There are many other quotes in the bible that I did not post that speak against rebellion.

Now I don't want to turn this into some debate, but I actually do not believe too many of our founding fathers were Christian and there's quotes that support that, but instead of typing about that, I will change the topic and end this e-mail on this thought -


One of the reasons I believe why President Lincoln did not let the South peacefully leave in the 1860's is because he feared it would create in one word: anarchy. How can you claim to be a Democracy or even a Republic if you take the results of a legal and correct election and throw out the results simply because you don't like them?

"Plainly, the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority, held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or despotism. Unanimity is impossible; the rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left." - Lincoln's First Inaugural Address on March 4, 1861


Instead of resorting to treason against this great country, why not just wait until the next election and get who you are want in there as President?


HIS RESPONSE -

So you freely admit that you don't believe the Bible from which you're attempting to moralize the rest of us. That's some top-notch hypocrisy you've got going there.


And if you really think the Texas secession movement started with the election of a single president, you've been living under a rock. If you had bothered to read any of the material written or cited at our site, you would have known that our basis for advocating secession is not unlike that of the American colonists, or of those Texans who first seceded from Mexico for very similar reasons. It's not about Obama. It's much bigger than that.


Lincoln said a lot of things — not all of them true. His chief concern over the departure of the South was a loss of tax revenue, since the South was paying disproportionately high federal tariffs, to the North's benefit.


Your accusation of "treason" is laughable in light of your apparent ignorance of both history and the secession movement's motives and background. I'd much rather be called a traitor and rebel by a hypocritical, head-in-the-sand statist like yourself, than compromise the principles of liberty and self-determination as defended by the founding generations of both Texas and the U.S.


Our readers are sure to enjoy reading about this little exchange. Thanks!


MY RESPONSE -

My pleasure! And if the last part is suppose to intimidate or embarrass me or something, you failed.

How much exactly are you going to show them anyhow? Even if you don't show them everything, you and I still know what was typed and it will just prove my point that no such group is purely good and everyone....especially those with the power to control things.....is corrupt. In your case, you can take these e-mails and twist them all you want or just not post them to make you come across as the good guy here even though from the start of this, you have been clearly hostile whereas I am trying to have a civil and mature discussion, but I think it also proves the point that some people cannot act like adults. They rather resort to acting like children and using violence or threats when things do not go their way. Gee, what does that remind me of.....hmm. The American Civil War? This crazy idea you guys have? Yeah, I think it's both actually.


Anyhow, I was not trying to do anything with the bible other then point out that most people who claim to be Christian are hypocrites and if hell exists, they will be burning in hell with me. In fact, I think any Christian who supports what you guys do is clearly not a real Christian. In fact, maybe they are actually the ones using the bible to promote their own ideas. But see, that is one of the many problems with the bible. Anyone can take it and use it to support what they believe because so many different people wrote in it.


Now I've read enough and I know enough about your idea to know that this country has always had problems, including Texas, and to just give up and quit is childish and if you really think Texas having it's own country is all of a sudden going to make everything better then you are living in a fantasy world. There would still be problems. In fact, things would probably be worst.

What if one day Northwest Texas decides it's tired of it's government's BS and decides to leave the Republic of Texas? Then Southeast Texas decides it wants to leave too. And on and on? Then there are no such things as countries anymore and we might as well be living backwards.

If secession were admitted as a legal device, then the future of the United States was easily written. The preamble to a Union Southern Rights Meeting in Stuart County, Georgia in the 1860's, warned, "If this confederacy is destroyed all is lost! Separation will follow separation, until the whole country is divided into little petty States and fractions, who, too weak to defend themselves, will become the prey of military leaders and demagogues."

Unionists realized that once secession was permitted, there was no stopping the process of fragmentation because any group with a complaint could then announce its intention to separate unless its wishes were fulfilled. Secession was the "squeal" of those who "must be allowed to do what [they] please." Caving in to secessionists would positively destroy any central government: "the inevitable consequence will be, that the Federal authority will cease to be respected at home."

In Alabama in the 1860's, a unionist believed "if the doctrine of `peaceable secession' is recognized, and the false pride or unreasonable whims of a State are deemed sufficient reasons for its exercise, no year would pass without some one of the States throwing the whole machinery of government into a score of weak but hostile communities."


Now if Texas became it's own country, our taxes would shoot through the roof. There'd be mo more FEMA or any other groups to help us if Mother Nature decides to smack us around again. NASCA is owned by the "Yankees" so we'd lose them. We'd lose our forts of course and the protection of the U.S. military so if Bin Laden decided to fight us and maybe use our state as a holding ground, we couldn't cry to Uncle Sam to save us and I doubt one state alone could take him on. Heck, who would U.T. play against in the big football games? Smiling The rivalry with O.U. would be no more.


I could seriously go on and on and on, but I think you get my point. You guys are acting like spoiled kids who are not getting what you want so you wanna run away from the home.


"Too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum." - James L. Petigru just before the American Civil War


HIS RESPONSE -

Now you're just wasting your words and time. You've had your say, and you won't get the last word — especially not by multiplying both words and insults.
=

MY RESPONSE -

lol. See, I knew you were going to do that. Heck, just like things are not going the way some Texans want it to go and they want to run away, this "debate" is not going your way so you decide just to end it and run away so you could get the last word.

You can have the last word. I just think you should have some honor and let the full debate be read and include my last e-mail to you. You can respond to it and then that can be the end of it.

.....But you're not going to respond to it are you? Smiling It's because you have no good responses. You're not interested in a debate or if people have different thoughts then you. You just wanna close your ears and go "lalalalallalalalaa".

You're other only reaction is to get frustrated and end this and use your power to make you come across as the hero. See, it's all about caring what others think with you, not what is truth and buddy, believe me, you can have the support of those people.

In fact, please post my e-mail up on the site too and welcome your readers to contact me. Maybe a smart person will actually respond and if not, I could use the laughs.

P. S.

Two can play this little game you have going. Smiling But unlike you, I'll actually post everything because that's the kind of American *I* am.

 

HIS RESPONSE -

Now you're just wasting your words and time.  You've had your say, and you won't get the last word — especially not by multiplying both words and insults.


(What part of that do you not understand?)
=

 

MY RESPONSE -

It's because you have no good responses. You're not interested in a debate or if people have different thoughts then you. You just wanna close your ears and go "lalalalallalalalaa".
 
What part of that do *you* not understand?
 
I intend to post our exchange in other places so it's actually you who won't get the last word. You can have your little website to post only part of this debate, but I still have the entire world wide web. Smiling
 
So by all means, post whatever lies you want cause I'm just gonna keep exposing you left and right for the fraud you are.
 
 
Thanks for having such a deep interest in what I do with my personal time by the way.

 

HIS RESPONSE -

 

You don't *know* what answers anyone does or doesn't have. Your 
presumption to carry on indefinitely an unsolicited, protracted 
"debate" by burying someone with longer and longer emails full of 
inane "arguments" is duly noted, and will be mentioned at 
publication.  Now kindly refrain from sending further emails to this 
address. You've been asked nicely.  Anything further from you shall 
constitute harassment.
 

 

 

Wow. What a freaking douche. Total and complete coward to the end.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
I honestly have some respect

I honestly have some respect for the ideals of libertarianism, but these people make me want to puke.  They spout of about revolution and armed rebellion but they can't defend their ideas in civil discourse.  

 

This same crop tends to be full of intelligent design people, young earthers and Biblical literalists.  Something about the mindset makes them incredibly certain about ideas they do not have a strong intellectual grasp on.  They value sources of authority (The Bible, the Constitution, their religious dogma, Bill and Rush, etc) far more highly than rational thinking or science based approaches and it makes it incredibly frustrating to deal with because their arguments are all emotional.  You can't debate with people who have willful faith at the root of every belief.

 

The current crop of radical right hysteria has discouraged me immensely.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3501
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  I'm familiar with that

  I'm familiar with that mindset.  I also live in Texas and in the early 90's I was still a fundamentalist Christian.  I was quickly becoming a gun nut ( still am ) , highly suspicious of governmental abuses ( still am ) and inadvertently associated with a lot of holier-than-thou religious types ( no longer ). 


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
Well, if this guy is a bible

Well, if this guy is a bible nutter (which I can't really tell from the OP), then you could try asking him about Leviticus 25:44 – 46.

 

Basically, if Texas did leave the United States, then I could walk up to him and wave cash in his face, for which he would have the biblical duty to give me title to his daughters as sex slaves (Texas now being a neighboring nation).

 

If you really want to try laying this out as a trap for him, try asking if he has a problem with paying Mexicans shitty wages for a hard day of digging holes on his land. If he is not paying the legal minimum wage for that, then he is, at least somewhat, in compliance with the above passage.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
I'm not sure I completely

I'm not sure I completely understand why someone would want to use a Bible to either encourage or discourage a rebellion. It's not like the Bible makes any mention to modern day Texas.


 

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13235
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
The difference between what

The difference between what the founders did and what the idiots of the south in the civil war did, and what the idiots in Texas want to do today is, the founders were NOT seeking to maintain the status quo or turn back the clock. The founders sought to open doors, not maintain monopolies of power.

The south was not fighting for freedom, although those in the south at the time falsely believed they were fighting for freedom, what they were fighting for was a fascist state where only white bible thumpers had power.

The people in Texas who want to become "independent" are not interested in lower taxes or the education or health care for all. The people who want this want to set up a Christian state, much like Iran is an Islamic state.

Any idiot trying to convince you that this movement is not a religious movement, is a liar. If any Christian reading this wants to know what a government run on religion is like, go live in Iran. The Christians Jews and atheists who are forced to live in silence in Iran have EVERY RIGHT TO BITCH. Christians in America who cry the false bullshit that America is a "Christian nation" are merely crying sour grapes now that more and more non-Christian legal citizens born in this country are refusing to take a back seat to Christians .

FACT, "NO RELIGIOUS TEST" is in OUR U.S. Constitution. If it is good enough for the rest of the country it should be good enough for Texas. It is not tyranny for government to recognize our Constitution as being neutral. It is not tyranny to say that our government is OURS and that others exist in this country.

"As the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" Article 11 BARBARY TREATY, signed into law by both houses of congress without dissent and signed by President John Adams June 10th 1797

These nuts do not understand what "secular" means and have bought the Faux News bullshit that "secular" is evil, when the reality if it were not for a "secular" government Christians would be fighting over which version of Jesus should run our government and be just as bloody as Sunnis and Shiites in the east.

"Secular" does not mean "outlaw" or "go away". "Secular" is simply the governmental attitude of "HANDS OFF" this issue and leave it up to the individual.

The founders WERE for freedom of religion, there is no dispute in that. But as a citizen I will not put up with the attitude that I have to take a back seat to anyone. There is no cross or star of David or Cresent Moon or atom symbol on our NEUTRAL American flag. And there are no property rights given to a god by any name in OUR Constitution.

If anyone supports Texas leaving the union, you are supporting the same bullshit that allows fascist states like Iran have. Government neutrality on the issue of religion IS NOT tyranny.

Your e-mail pal is a moron and needs to grow up and stop pretending that his god is the only one people believe in and the only one that should have power over government. All believers all over the world of all labels need to stop this tribal bullshit and stop pretending that their deity is the center of the universe. You need to tell this idiot, the he, just like me, are 1 of 6 billion on this planet and that he, nor me are special and no human deserves special rights over another human, "Just because" they claim this or that.

Texans who truly value freedom should condemn these nuts. The world is moving forward and this backwards gang mentality is antiquated and childish.

People who truly believe that a god(by any name of any religion) owns humans or land like property, to me, are no better than street gangs fighting over drug territory.

Your e-mail pale has been sold a bill og goods by theocratic fascists who would destroy the very thing they falsely claim to be fighting for. They don't want freedom for everyone, they want a monopoly of power.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce - These people

Whatthedeuce - These people all claim to be Christians yet they break their own rules. That's why I throw bible quotes at them. Heck, a lot of these Lost Cause Neo-Reb folks are all about the bible too and love to judge others, yet their entire bible says that rebellion is sinful. I just attempt to make them realize that they are no better then the rest of us "heathens".

Brian37 - Amen! lol. Preach on. I totally agree. I sometimes get into it with these hicks and these neo-reb losers about that very issue. It's like these jerks wanna try to force us into Heaven at gun point.

These people know they are wrong too. That's why that jerk was no longer interested in debating and why he ended it and pretty much acted like an overgrown kid and was like..."I'm gonna tell Mommy and Daddy on you!". Funny how he loves the same law he wants to turn against it. Truly, a lot of these Christian redneck morons are like they. They are NOT interested in debating or defending their views. They wanna do like what Richard Dawkins said said....close their ears and go...."lalalalalalala". And many of them will often resort into some form of "I'm gonna tell you" like this jerk in the e-mail exchanges ended up doing. Heck, my former co-worker actually went and told my boss because of a "debate" we had that she lost. It was funny and sad at the same time. If they knew anything about these topics, defending them would be easy. I can defend my opinions just fine, which is why I do not get headaches or annoyed if I'm debating over any issue online or offline.

 Thank goodness the South did lose the American Civil War or otherwise, areas that Bin Laden controls would be right here. Not litreally of course, but the same look and feel about be there, only it'd be Jesus would be the one everyone is forced to worship instead of Allah. I know many people talk about the South having a right to leave and it not being over slavery and this and that, and let's say for argument's sake that they were right. Still does not change that these people were looking for a Christian nation where everyone is forced into church at gun point.

Anyhow, great post Brian!


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote: I honestly

mellestad wrote:

I honestly have some respect for the ideals of libertarianism, but these people make me want to puke.  They spout of about revolution and armed rebellion but they can't defend their ideas in civil discourse.  

 

This same crop tends to be full of intelligent design people, young earthers and Biblical literalists.  Something about the mindset makes them incredibly certain about ideas they do not have a strong intellectual grasp on.  They value sources of authority (The Bible, the Constitution, their religious dogma, Bill and Rush, etc) far more highly than rational thinking or science based approaches and it makes it incredibly frustrating to deal with because their arguments are all emotional.  You can't debate with people who have willful faith at the root of every belief.

 

The current crop of radical right hysteria has discouraged me immensely.

I personally mirror the sentiment of most of this post, but I can assure you that none too many right-wingers give O'Reilly much significance or take him very seriously.

Also, while the constitution/BoR may strike many as archaic, when all else fails (like with the way the government is catastrophically failing to serve the people right now), it does help to go back to the basics- aka The Great Writ.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Higgins
Posts: 33
Joined: 2010-07-21
User is offlineOffline
I can understand the desire

I can understand the desire for secession. I was born in rural Virginia and was taught about the 'War of Northern Aggression'. To have smaller, easier controlled, and less invasive government is a desire for many, but it is unlikely to happen anytime soon, but secession is not the answer to achieving this goal. While Texas may have the right to secede (ironically the only state which has the right to do so according to their constitution passed by the federal government), they as the only ones to probably do so would be unwise, mainly because of the massive military, economic, and social power the rest of the United States has.

 

Now it should be noted that there are benefits, I believe to secession, but only if every state were to do so, become wholly independent, and reunify. The reasons would be a much higher economic power in the United States (similar to the ones we see currently in the European Union), but this would be a pipe dream.

 

"Lycurgus, Numa, Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, all these great rogues, all these great thought-tyrants, knew how to associate the divinities they fabricated with their own boundless ambition."

-Marquis de Sade


Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
I'm not aware of any

I'm not aware of any secession clause in Texas.

 


Higgins
Posts: 33
Joined: 2010-07-21
User is offlineOffline
Zeeboe wrote:I'm not aware

Zeeboe wrote:

I'm not aware of any secession clause in Texas.

 

 

You are right, my mistake there isnt a clause in the Texas Constitution

"Lycurgus, Numa, Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, all these great rogues, all these great thought-tyrants, knew how to associate the divinities they fabricated with their own boundless ambition."

-Marquis de Sade


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
Higgins wrote:Now it should

Higgins wrote:

Now it should be noted that there are benefits, I believe to secession, but only if every state were to do so, become wholly independent, and reunify. The reasons would be a much higher economic power in the United States (similar to the ones we see currently in the European Union), but this would be a pipe dream.

 

I was unaware of the idea that dissolving the federal government and having all the states be independent countries would cause the U.S. economic power to increase. My immediate reaction would be to guess that the exact opposite would happen, but I have not given it much thought or researched the topic. Could you please explain why we would see an increase in economic power?

edit: A definition of what you consider "economic power" means would probably be helpful as well. I had just assumed you were referring to purchasing power. This seems to imply that simultaneous secession of all the states would somehow cause the net assets of Americans to increase, the liquidity of US assets to increase, or the value of the dollar to increase. However, if you meant something else by "economic power" it might be more obvious. 

 

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce wrote:Higgins

Whatthedeuce wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Now it should be noted that there are benefits, I believe to secession, but only if every state were to do so, become wholly independent, and reunify. The reasons would be a much higher economic power in the United States (similar to the ones we see currently in the European Union), but this would be a pipe dream.

I was unaware of the idea that dissolving the federal government and having all the states be independent countries would cause the U.S. economic power to increase. My immediate reaction would be to guess that the exact opposite would happen, but I have not given it much thought or researched the topic. Could you please explain why we would see an increase in economic power?

edit: A definition of what you consider "economic power" means would probably be helpful as well. I had just assumed you were referring to purchasing power. This seems to imply that simultaneous secession of all the states would somehow cause the net assets of Americans to increase, the liquidity of US assets to increase, or the value of the dollar to increase. However, if you meant something else by "economic power" it might be more obvious.

 

I'm guessing that the idea is we wouldn't have to pay federal income tax anymore and therefore, everyone's purchasing power would increase.  At the moment, for me on unemployment, that would be about $50 a week.  I'm not saying I couldn't use it.

The problem with this reasoning is that large scale infrastructure projects typically funded at least in part by federal money, would either be abandoned or the states would have to increase taxes to complete them.  My unemployment check would disappear completely since I am currently on the federal extension and do not qualify for state only unemployment.  Schools, medicaid, medicare, some state welfare programs, national parks and museums and forests, and various other amenities would become less funded or totally unfunded.  There are negative consequences to this.

Decreasing taxes that dramatically and expecting only positive outcomes is a little simplistic.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Higgins
Posts: 33
Joined: 2010-07-21
User is offlineOffline
Whatthedeuce wrote:Higgins

Whatthedeuce wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Now it should be noted that there are benefits, I believe to secession, but only if every state were to do so, become wholly independent, and reunify. The reasons would be a much higher economic power in the United States (similar to the ones we see currently in the European Union), but this would be a pipe dream.

 

I was unaware of the idea that dissolving the federal government and having all the states be independent countries would cause the U.S. economic power to increase. My immediate reaction would be to guess that the exact opposite would happen, but I have not given it much thought or researched the topic. Could you please explain why we would see an increase in economic power?

edit: A definition of what you consider "economic power" means would probably be helpful as well. I had just assumed you were referring to purchasing power. This seems to imply that simultaneous secession of all the states would somehow cause the net assets of Americans to increase, the liquidity of US assets to increase, or the value of the dollar to increase. However, if you meant something else by "economic power" it might be more obvious. 

 

 

My idea would only work if all the states were to secceed become completely independent (have their own power, water, economy, currency, military, import/export, education, taxes, etc.) without the influence of other states/the federal government. I really only base this upon the current wealth of the EU, which had various countries as independent nations for centuries all with their own economies and then brought them together. If we had a system such as that, it could work, but again I think it is a pipe dream.

When I say economic power, I am talking about the GDP of the nation (or individual states in this case).

"Lycurgus, Numa, Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, all these great rogues, all these great thought-tyrants, knew how to associate the divinities they fabricated with their own boundless ambition."

-Marquis de Sade


Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
That's cool Higgins. I had

That's cool Higgins. I had to point out to some guy on youtube the othe rday that the Texas flag CANNOT be on the same level as the U.S.A.flag and gave him a snopes link to prove it. There are actually a lot of Christians Texans out there that think we can legally leave and that the Texas Flag can be on the same level as the Stars and Stripes.

 

I tell ya, if I was not a Texan....I'd probably hate this place. lol. I sometimes wish I was a Yankee or an Englishman or a Canuck. Anything by a freakin' Dixie boy. I mean, I personally know not all of Texas is as bad as we appear to be in the press and I live in Austin which is a very hip, artsy, liberal, college and party city and you would not think you were in Texas if you were here maybe, and I am very grateful for the fact that I was lucky enough to live in one of the few cool places in this hick, bible-belt state.

I hate being in the south sometimes, but I figure....I can help what I believe by being right here in the Devil's den, fighting and standing up to this rebel and Christian nonsense. I mean, it's one thing that these people are all Jesus freaks and like country music, but then some of them.....not all of them....but some don't seem proud to be Americans and want their own country or some nonsense and I want to belong to a country that actually exists and the people that live there are proud to be in that country.

 


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Higgins wrote:Whatthedeuce

Higgins wrote:

Whatthedeuce wrote:

Higgins wrote:

Now it should be noted that there are benefits, I believe to secession, but only if every state were to do so, become wholly independent, and reunify. The reasons would be a much higher economic power in the United States (similar to the ones we see currently in the European Union), but this would be a pipe dream.

 

I was unaware of the idea that dissolving the federal government and having all the states be independent countries would cause the U.S. economic power to increase. My immediate reaction would be to guess that the exact opposite would happen, but I have not given it much thought or researched the topic. Could you please explain why we would see an increase in economic power?

edit: A definition of what you consider "economic power" means would probably be helpful as well. I had just assumed you were referring to purchasing power. This seems to imply that simultaneous secession of all the states would somehow cause the net assets of Americans to increase, the liquidity of US assets to increase, or the value of the dollar to increase. However, if you meant something else by "economic power" it might be more obvious. 

 

 

My idea would only work if all the states were to secceed become completely independent (have their own power, water, economy, currency, military, import/export, education, taxes, etc.) without the influence of other states/the federal government. I really only base this upon the current wealth of the EU, which had various countries as independent nations for centuries all with their own economies and then brought them together. If we had a system such as that, it could work, but again I think it is a pipe dream.

When I say economic power, I am talking about the GDP of the nation (or individual states in this case).

Yea, the problem is our states have not been self sufficient for hundreds of years.  Every EU country had a more or less self sufficient economic system in place before they started unification, the US states wouldn't even have a place to start.  Maybe a few could make it...Texas, California, New York, etc...but the other states would collapse immediately.

 

The irony is, barring Texas, the citizens clamoring for vast reductions in the Fed are typically living in states that suck the hardest from the Federal tit they hate so much.

 

Honestly though, Texas could make it on its own, as long as it didn't need to maintain any substantial military (I don't know why it would).

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Rich Woods
Rational VIP!
Rich Woods's picture
Posts: 868
Joined: 2008-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Zeeboe wrote:I'm not aware

Zeeboe wrote:

I'm not aware of any secession clause in Texas.

 

 

Could we write one and let them leave?


atomicdogg34
atheist
atomicdogg34's picture
Posts: 321
Joined: 2009-12-26
User is offlineOffline
dont know or care about any

dont know or care about any biblical justification or not for succession but i know that the principle of succession should be upheld

its how this country came to be, it was the states who created the federal govt (not the other way around) and did so under terms of a contract (the Constitution), if the federal govt violates the contract than the states have the right to withdraw from the agreement

its a tool that should only be used as a last resort but its a tool that can keep the federal govt honest

Proof FDR was a tyrant and a POS: Executive Order 9066

Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy.
-Ron Paul


Whatthedeuce
atheist
Whatthedeuce's picture
Posts: 200
Joined: 2008-07-19
User is offlineOffline
Higgins wrote:I really only

Higgins wrote:
I really only base this upon the current wealth of the EU, which had various countries as independent nations for centuries all with their own economies and then brought them together. If we had a system such as that, it could work, but again I think it is a pipe dream.

When I say economic power, I am talking about the GDP of the nation (or individual states in this case).

The current wealth of the EU doesn't mean anything in relation to this topic by itself. If you are going to statistics to back up this claim, you have to show that the EU's GDP is higher than it would be if all of its members were united as one nation, and that the same conditions which caused this are also present in America.

 

So, then what reason do you have to believe that the EU's current GDP is higher than what it otherwise would be if Europe were united as one nation? And, what reason do you have to believe that the conditions which lead to this GDP disparity are also present in America?

I don't understand why the Christians I meet find it so confusing that I care about the fact that they are wasting huge amounts of time and resources playing with their imaginary friend. Even non-confrontational religion hurts atheists because we live in a society which is constantly wasting resources and rejecting rational thinking.


Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mellestad- If Texas became

mellestad- If Texas became it's own country, our taxes would shoot through the roof. There'd be mo more FEMA to help us if Mother Nature decides to smack us around again. NASA is owned by the "Yankees" so we'd lose them. We'd lose our forts of course and the protection of the U.S. military so if Bin Laden decided to fight us and maybe use our state as a holding ground, we couldn't cry to Uncle Sam to save us and I doubt one state alone could take him on.

Heck, who would U.T. play against in the big football games? Smiling The rivalry with O.U. would be no more. Who would our sports team play? We would be like the Canadians in American leagues? Well, guess what? Those Canadians teams never last in any sport. Our franchises would have to be shut down and moved to the Union. We'd also need our own FBI, C.I.A., our own post office, FDA, etc. We have a lot of nuclear power planets. Where are we going to put the nuclear waste? The Alamo? What about college grants? What about our own Air Force, Navy, Army, Marines, etc to protect us? That would cost money to create. We also would need our own police of course and firefighters, doctors, etc. It's all about the $ and we cannot make it our own. We would become a very poor, third world country.

Shoot man, these good ol' boy redneck white guys who make white men like me look very bad are a dying breed compared to the Mexican-Americans and I am betting they would at some point vote to put Texas back into Mexico and all those white boys will be running back into the Union and they would deserve that and deserved to be DENIED entry after all this nonsense they've caused. That would actually be PERFECT karma for them!

 

Back in the 1861, President Lincoln feared there would have been anarchy if he just let the South go and become their own nation and there probably would not be a U.S.A. today if he did. Because first it's the South leaving, but then next thing you know...everyone wants their own "ccountry" and then every state would be divided into little petty states and fractions and being open for attacks from guys like Hitler.

If the C.S.A. won the American Civil War, what would have stopped states from leaving them at some point? Next thing you know, we are not a whole country, but as I typed, instead we would just be small little states and we could not depend on one another for help or money when we need it.

That is how the human race lives. We all help each other. And like I asked that redneck, how can you claim to be a Democracy or even a Republic if you take the results of a legal and correct election and throw out the results simply because you don't like them?

Taking your ball and going home isn't going to make life better. There would still be problems. think the idea of Texas or the South becoming it's own country is a nice little dream a lot of Neo-Rebs have, but they never realistically think about what it would take to be it's own country and that is a lot of money we do not have. It's better if we all stay in the Union, deal with what we have and make the best of it.

We have it made here. We're lucky to be Americans. People from all over the world come *here* for better lives. Be grateful to be an American apart of this great Union. Now are are we perfect? No. Are we greatest? Heck no. I think England and Canada has us beat because those guys have free health care and there's less violence.

 

lol Rich! Only if I'm allowed to move afterwards to another state and will get a rent free apartment for a year while I look for work. I'd want to take the Alamo Drafthouse with me though and move to a city that loves Halloween as much as Austin does.

 

 

In closing, is treason legal? Yes it sadly is. Should we do it? No way. Drinking and driving was legal once too. There are and STILL are A LOT of stupid laws. Legal treason is one of them in my *opinion".


Zeeboe
Posts: 332
Joined: 2007-07-15
User is offlineOffline
mellestad- If Texas became

Double post. Sorry.


Higgins
Posts: 33
Joined: 2010-07-21
User is offlineOffline
https://www.cia.gov/library/p

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2001rank.htm for GDP information ranking the countries the last time I looked the EU was much higher, but it appears it has changed.

"Lycurgus, Numa, Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, all these great rogues, all these great thought-tyrants, knew how to associate the divinities they fabricated with their own boundless ambition."

-Marquis de Sade


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:The irony

mellestad wrote:
The irony is, barring Texas, the citizens clamoring for vast reductions in the Fed are typically living in states that suck the hardest from the Federal tit they hate so much.

With the exception of Florida and Georgia, this is quite true, unfortunately.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3501
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Zeeboe wrote:  Shoot man,

Zeeboe wrote:

 

 

Shoot man, these good ol' boy redneck white guys who make white men like me look very bad are a dying breed compared to the Mexican-Americans and I am betting they would at some point vote to put Texas back into Mexico and all those white boys will be running back into the Union and they would deserve that and deserved to be DENIED entry after all this nonsense they've caused. That would actually be PERFECT karma for them!

 

    Secession with a Canadian flair,   .....not just for tobacco chewing, pickup driving, red necks anymore:   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_re_Secession_of_Quebec


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Zee wrote:That is how the

Zee wrote:
That is how the human race lives. We all help each other.

Sentences like these might, perhaps, be the best reason to thumb one's nose at The Union -the BIG LIE that modern society is somehow inherently philanthropistic.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)