The 48 states of the union.....

vikingshadow · 11-10-2012, 08:23 PM

I saw this today, and did a little checking online and yes, according to Google, Texas and Louisiana do actually have petitions circulating to peaceably withdraw from the United States. The Louisiana petition actually used the opening of the Declaration of Independence as their reason for leaving and the Texas one has listed, among other things, the fact that they have the 16th largest economy in the world as evidence they can handle leaving the US. Apparently, all they need is 25,000 signatures and they can petition the White House with this. As of today, Louisiana has 5000+ signatures and Texas has 1500 or so.

I knew Texas could do this, but was unaware that other states could. What think you? If they actually go through with it (which I don't think they will) will other states follow suit?

Just a couple things I pulled off Google, but you can find several more from different sources....

Louisiana
Texas

SupraSuper · 11-10-2012, 08:56 PM

Wait until LA has another Katrina and see how bad they'll be begging to get some aide from the feds.

Animal_Mother (Banned) · 11-10-2012, 09:10 PM

After how the feds handled the first Katrina, I'm not too sure that they will be waiting for any help from them.

BodyCount81 · 11-10-2012, 09:35 PM

Wow is all I can say. As much as I hate the way our countries direction is going, secession would be a huge mistake.

paintballty99 · 11-10-2012, 10:31 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

As ruled in Texas vs. White, any right for Texas to secede from the United States is null and void, regardless of what their state constitution says.

But don't let a Texan fool you. They seem to pride themselves on believing they can actually do it if they wanted to.

barrel roll · 11-10-2012, 10:40 PM

Quote:

The Union of the States never was a purely artificial and arbitrary relation. It began among the Colonies, and grew out of common origin, mutual sympathies, kindred principles, similar interests, and geographical relations. It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indissoluble if a perpetual Union, made more perfect, is not?

Just another instance of the supreme court being wrong, as succession was a viable option for states in 1814/15. So was nullification, FYI.

barrel roll · 11-10-2012, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BodyCount81

Wow is all I can say. As much as I hate the way our countries direction is going, secession would be a huge mistake.

Why? Why would creating a new state be a big mistake? No... that isn't right, or at least it isn't the most correct. Why would leaving the American Union be a mistake?

ddr421 · 11-10-2012, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paintballty99

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

As ruled in Texas vs. White, any right for Texas to secede from the United States is null and void, regardless of what their state constitution says.

But don't let a Texan fool you. They seem to pride themselves on believing they can actually do it if they wanted to.

find me a spot in the NEW Texas constitution(from 1876, the one that was officially approved by senate for re-admittance to the union that says Texas cant or can secede from the united states.

And in response to your claim and im guessing that your logic is that the version of the constitution that was rejected for the first attempt to rejoin the union is the one in use now(its not).
..

"When Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

"...The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union ...remained perfect and unimpaired. ...the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union.

"...Our conclusion therefore is, that Texas continued to be a State, and a State of the Union."
— Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700, 703 (1868)

and nice job using Wikipedia that's seriously a joke for use as backing!

http://www.texassecede.com/ enjoy!

licence2kill · 11-10-2012, 11:21 PM

wikipedia vs texassecede.com

hmm...

ddr421 · 11-10-2012, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by licence2kill

wikipedia vs texassecede.com

hmm...

granted texassecede is slightl biased, but they attempted to make as unbiased in view and facts as possible. and do use some groups that are very reputable

Overbear · 11-11-2012, 12:08 AM

I am all for it, then we can talk the new country of Texas into nuking LA county, san diego county, san francisco, berkley, santa cruz county, and humbolt county...and CA will be a nice conservitive place and we can join Texas in leaving the joke that the US has become.

ddr421 · 11-11-2012, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overbear

I am all for it, then we can talk the new country of Texas into nuking LA county, san diego county, san francisco, berkley, santa cruz county, and humbolt county...and CA will be a nice conservitive place and we can join Texas in leaving the joke that the US has become.

ummm it you nuke them youd only need like 3 nukes for the whole thing...

and france could "invade" Texas and since just about every ones at elast a pistol wed jsut have to aim at them theyd drop all their guns and ammo thus arming the entire then state/country for a good sized battle

Umami (Banned) · 11-11-2012, 12:14 AM

I'm fine with it, as long as we remove all federal assets before they go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overbear

I am all for it, then we can talk the new country of Texas into nuking LA county, san diego county, san francisco, berkley, santa cruz county, and humbolt county...and CA will be a nice conservitive place and we can join Texas in leaving the joke that the US has become.

Texas doesn't own any nukes.

ladd_17 · 11-11-2012, 12:40 AM

I'd rather see us return to a pre-Lincoln style Union before states begin just outright seceding.

ddr421 · 11-11-2012, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Umami

I'm fine with it, as long as we remove all federal assets before they go.

Texas doesn't own any nukes.

Or do we?! ;-)
Pretty sure all of the locations of nukes aren't disclosed. There'd be no point having them if everyone knew we they were

F1VENOM · 11-11-2012, 12:58 AM

It wouldn't matter, you'd be responsible for your own defense and thus all US Military seaward would be removed pending mutual agreements and then you'd have no control over them.

Neither state could secede, they'd just degrade until they were absorbed back into Mexico or the US.

licence2kill · 11-11-2012, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladd_17

I'd rather see us return to a pre-Lincoln style Union before states begin just outright seceding.

Said by no person of color ever

Blake360 · 11-11-2012, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overbear

I am all for it, then we can talk the new country of Texas into nuking LA county, san diego county, san francisco, berkley, santa cruz county, and humbolt county...and CA will be a nice conservitive place and we can join Texas in leaving the joke that the US has become.

Nuking San Leandro would be a better idea.

Umami (Banned) · 11-11-2012, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ddr421

Or do we?! ;-)
Pretty sure all of the locations of nukes aren't disclosed. There'd be no point having them if everyone knew we they were

Regardless of where they're located, the Texas armed forces have no control over them and they're owned by the Department of Defense.

You have zero nukes... and perhaps the realities of succession are sinking in.

yesme · 11-11-2012, 06:28 AM

Um, i'm pretty sure the case could be made that texas taxes have paid for the hardware in their state as far as weapons goes.

ddr421 · 11-11-2012, 06:58 AM

Texans already own their own guns, have enough privately owned gun shops that it wouldn't matter what the us government took back, since Texas has its own army that is under the control of the governor, i don't remember if the naval ships with Texas names are owned by the state or national government though. the USS Texas is owned by the a private group if i remember correctly

basically Texas would be fine, you dont have to have all the really big cool toys to win a war but they sure as hell help