1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Antietam Protest

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Boom_70, Jun 11, 2006.

  1. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    I lived seven years in Hagerstown, the closest "big city". We even found bullets in the battlefield a couple decades ago.

    I didn't want to post here, until I saw the western PA'ers tailgating at Big Ben's hospital. Then I didn't feel quite so bad.

    This country is nuts.
  2. novelist_wannabe

    novelist_wannabe Well-Known Member

    Fenian, a more relevant reference might be the first 10 words of Article I, Section 10: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation.
  3. Also a good one.
  4. Football_Bat

    Football_Bat Well-Known Member

    I think Texas is an exception. It was its own republic before it became a state, therefore the only state to join the Union via treaty rather than annexation. (The fact that it joined the Confederacy by the slimmest of margins doomed it to military action.) Texas can probably legally secede whenever it wants to. But it'll never happen.
  5. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    FB and NW, thanks for clearing that up. I'm no constitutional scholar, but that question has always intrigued me. I guess once you're in the club, you can't get out. Sort of like a gang.

    That really added to the discussion. Thanks.
  6. novelist_wannabe

    novelist_wannabe Well-Known Member

    I'm no constitutional scholar either. But when I came across this thread, I went and found a copy and read it, mainly because I had this remembrance of the phrase from the Declaration of Independence: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Had my documents confused. Apparently the confederate states felt it was their right and their duty to throw off the existing government. It looks to me that they were ignoring the question of "absolute despotism," (I'm sure that's where slaves felt they were), but the DOI doesn't establish our societal framework. The Constitution does.
  7. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    If you were you would have to wear a bow tie.
  8. boots

    boots New Member

    Technically speaking, Lincoln had no authority, except a morale one, to free the slaves. The Confederate States were technically another country.
    As for the war, the South loss.End of story.
    However, slavery is still an issue for many in the United States. It's just on a different level.
  9. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member


    I'm a Constitutional scholar!
  10. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    Although it does bring up a fascinating counter-argument. If the states could technically never seceed, why did they have to be readmitted to the Union?
  11. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    Texas is indeed unique in that it has a provision in its constitution to allow for it to be split into multiple, regional states as opposed to one big one.
  12. n_w --
    Technically, they weren't "readmitted." Once they fulfilled certain conditions, they resumed their status as if the war never happened, with the same boundaries etc. (If they'd had to apply for readmission, the border skirmishes and land fraud alone might still be going on.) That's how Alexander Hamilton Stephens, the VP of the CSA, went right back to being the US senator from Georgia, like nothing ever happened.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page