Is secession the answer?

#101
#101
If its mutually agreeable to all sides and nonviolent, then sure.

This would be a fairly significant downgrade to quality of life in the south. Seems foolish to want such a thing now with such relatively small ideological matters separating us from the rest of the country.
 
#106
#106
hog88 said:
Yeah God forbid our government resemble it's intended design.
Click to expand...

A chief aim of the Constitution as drafted by the Convention was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk.

Requiring people to wear masks during a pandemic is no different than requiring car drivers to wear seat belts. It's common sense and saves lives.

You may not like it, but your fundamental rights are not unlimited, nor should they be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lerxtwood, tvolsfan and Purple Tiger
#107
#107
MontyPython said:
A chief aim of the Constitution as drafted by the Convention was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk.

Requiring people to wear masks during a pandemic is no different than requiring car drivers to wear seat belts. It's common sense and saves lives.

You may not like it, but your fundamental rights are not unlimited, nor should they be.
Click to expand...

That is completely false.

The reason the federal government can require people wear seat belts is by holding the states hostage with the threat of withholding of funds. If the federal government was scaled back to the power to coin money, regulate commerce, to declare war, provide for the common defense and establish a post office the states would not need federal money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO, 82_VOL_83, McDad and 3 others
#108
#108
hog88 said:
That is completely false.

The reason the federal government can require people wear seat belts is by holding the states hostage with the threat of withholding of funds. If the federal government was scaled back to the power to coin money, regulate commerce, to declare war, provide for the common defense and establish a post office the states would not need federal money.
Click to expand...

*cough*

The South ain't gonna rise again. Larger federal power has more benefits than drawbacks in today's world. The Earth is shrinking, and we must compete with the China's of the world. How'd fracturing into pieces turn out for the USSR? Mhhhhmmm.
 
#109
#109
MontyPython said:
A chief aim of the Constitution as drafted by the Convention was to create a government with enough power to act on a national level, but without so much power that fundamental rights would be at risk.

Requiring people to wear masks during a pandemic is no different than requiring car drivers to wear seat belts. It's common sense and saves lives.

You may not like it, but your fundamental rights are not unlimited, nor should they be.
Click to expand...

There shouldn't be seat belt laws. Those aren't in place to save lives they are in place as another revenue stream and a way to hassle people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83, GSD82 and Boston Vol
#112
#112
MontyPython said:
*cough*

The South ain't gonna rise again. Larger federal power has more benefits than drawbacks in today's world. The Earth is shrinking, and we must compete with the China's of the world. How'd fracturing into pieces turn out for the USSR? Mhhhhmmm.
Click to expand...

I don't want the "South to rise again" we are much stronger and prosperous together but that cannot be maintained another 100 years with the vastly differing ideals and values we have. And no a larger federal power does not have more benefits, it takes away individual liberty and stifles freedom. A central power in a country this large and diverse becomes insensitive to the needs, customs, way of life of it's citizens and ends up trying one size fits all solutions which do not work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83, McDad, Pepe_Silvia and 2 others
#120
#120
MontyPython said:
Ergo WHY WE HAVE LAWS AGAINST THIS BEHAVIOR.

I mean friggin DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH.
Click to expand...

Sounds so simple right? It's not that simple, DUI laws are not in place to reduce drunk driving fatalities, they are there to collect revenue and give teh state the power to search you and your vehicle any time they please.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83, Rasputin_Vol, jaybird_1981 and 1 other person
#121
#121
hog88 said:
Sounds so simple right? It's not that simple, DUI laws are not in place to reduce drunk driving fatalities, they are there to collect revenue and give teh state the power to search you and your vehicle any time they please.
Click to expand...

...and there he goes....


tenor (54).gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#122
#122
MontyPython said:
Ergo WHY WE HAVE LAWS AGAINST THIS BEHAVIOR.

I mean friggin DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH.
Click to expand...
Look at traffic laws now. More and more they are designed to trigger a stop and with any luck the fishing expedition pays off with 2 grams of weed or the always convenient "faint odor of alcohol". In TN you can now be pulled over for driving too slow, which of course is at the discretion of the officer. I don't see how people can simultaneously think the police are out of control while also craving they have these ridiculous precrime powers that lead to lots of unnecessary encounters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaybird_1981 and hog88
#123
#123
DancingOutlaw said:
Look at traffic laws now. More and more they are designed to trigger a stop and with any luck the fishing expedition pays off with 2 grams of weed or the always convenient "faint odor of alcohol". In TN you can now be pulled over for driving too slow, which of course is at the discretion of the officer. I don't see how people can simultaneously think the police are out of control while also craving they have these ridiculous precrime powers that lead to lots of unnecessary encounters.
Click to expand...

So, just for the record, you think laws prohibiting driving under the influence are "bad"?
 
#124
#124
hog88 said:
I don't want the "South to rise again" we are much stronger and prosperous together but that cannot be maintained another 100 years with the vastly differing ideals and values we have. And no a larger federal power does not have more benefits, it takes away individual liberty and stifles freedom. A central power in a country this large and diverse becomes insensitive to the needs, customs, way of life of it's citizens and ends up trying one size fits all solutions which do not work.
Click to expand...

Why is it each and every time this subject comes up, some idiot brings up the Confederacy? It's like turning on a porch light in the summer. You're going to attract stupid and annoying moths. And before long, some idiot will play the race card.

It certainly can't be because some states just feel like their interests are no longer being served by a bloated federal government that's grabbed far more power than was intended. Or they just see the writing on the wall that our differences will never be reconciled.

I agree we should have an American "Brexit" option if States feel like the federal government no longer suits their needs. But I think we both know those in power will never give up that power voluntarily. We will have another "civil war" and I highly doubt the international community will sit that one out. But this one will be far bloodier than the last one as too much anger, frustration and hatred has been allowed to build and even encouraged by those in power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, McDad, MWR and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top