The philosophical differences between those of the right and those on the left on the political spectrum are so great that the threat of a civil war is a distinct possibility. With both sides unwilling to compromise, I think the best solution would be to convert our one divided nation into two separate countries.
Compromise is not possible, The only way to prevent another civil war is to create two separate nations.
Rather than having one disunited nation, we would be much better off as two separate and distinct. I think that California should secede from the United States and become a new blue nation and Texas were to secede and become a red nation the potential of a war between the states could be avoided..
Any of the other states who desired to secede could they join the republic of California or Texas. Any resident unhappy with the political ideology of their new state would be able to free to pack their bags and move to a state where their values were shared by the vast majority of the residents.
So the State of Georgia did not appear stating that as a sovereign state they had the right to choose if someone could file suit against them and no one could change that. This, as so many other actions and recorded writings does, verifies that they founded the united States as a union of States not one country under God.
for your knowledge......
Constitutional Amendments 1-10 make up what is known as The Bill of Rights. Amendments 11-27 are listed below.
Passed by Congress March 4, 1794. Ratified February 7, 1795.
Note: Article III, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 11. The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
Passed by Congress December 9, 1803. Ratified June 15, 1804.
Note: A portion of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution was superseded by the 12th amendment. The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; -- the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; -- The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. [And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. --]* The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States. *Superseded by section 3 of the 20th amendment.
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
I have read all the amendments as they are officially written Jim. I asked the question because I thought I had read there was a different original 11th amendment. I asked Morton because I knew he would know if there was one. He is much more knowledgeable than I am.
sorry to have offended you by providing the 11th and 12th but it sounded as though you were not familiar with them. I will try to interpret the meaning you are actually asking for. and per your last statement I was not attaching you, nor do I wish to attack you and I personally am much happier with Trump than with crooked hillary or odumbo. So I apologize fir you misinterpreting what I was saying. Have a great life and I will live mine as God has asked of us all.
I am just holding a conversation. No ill will held. I am not offended. I was just saying i knew the amendments. Its all good I just want to keep things civil. I enjoy the discourse and have learned a lot over the years here with you guys. I too would never vote for hillary or obumma. I refuse to vote for any republican or democrats. I vote for the constitution party because of its stands for returning to constitutional restraint. I hope you will continue to converse with me in the future. It keeps us all growing . besides we all have the same goal, i believe
I too voted for the Constitutional Party candidate. That was the last time I will ever vote in this crooked game.
I will never vote in another election either. It is rigged for any but the 2 major parties to fail
The "originally proposed" amendments were a set of twelve proposals, the 11th and 12th of which were what we currently know as the 9th and 10th Amendments. Does that help?
I remember hearing that. I think it may have been an improvement.
Makes magnificent sense to me.
The unpleasant truth is that the acute ideological differences besetting this country are clearly unbridgeable. I don't believe there is any doubt about that now. Ours is, by design, a voluntary union of States. VOLUNTARY. There is no serious question about that. If not voluntary, then each State at the republic's inception would have knowingly accepted a subservient status in that new union which they created.
Well, the creators did not empower their creation to dominate its creators. Not at all. The States insisted upon the feds and themselves honoring the principle of dual State-federal sovereignty as enshrined in Art VI. Sadly and foolishly, however, since 1865 the chastened States have accepted vassalage vs upholding the founding principle of dual sovereignty.
The War of Northern Aggression did not alter our founders' design and understanding in this regard. Absent States asserting their natural (revolution) and 10th amendment authority (secession, nullification) to properly represent and safeguard the interests and values of their respective citizens, then what's the point of a Constitution at all?
Without being able or indisposed to nullifying, rebelling or seceding, then the States forfeited their inherent and constitutional right to sovereignty. In short, they accepted enslavement.
Peaceful secession is absolutely do-able and absolutely justified and lawful. The sooner it happens the better. Sure beats bloody civil war and rebellion. To defend against foreign meddling and threats, all American confederacies, whether two or more, may wisely opt to become militarily allied.
I look eagerly forward to the overdue divorce.
What you say is true. The problem is peaceable secession was tried in 1860. It failed. The powers that rule will never allow a peaceful secession they want to enforce our enslavement for their profit.
In simplest terms, "it failed" because the CSA was badly outgunned and outnumbered. It didn't fail because secession was unlawful or morally reprehensible.
Rebellion, nullification and secession remain founder-sanctioned and commonsense remedies. And I don't agree that secession must be violent, especially in this day and age.
In fact, it would be exceptional for secession to be anything but peaceable. Conditions today are in NO WAY analogous to those of 1861. Only if the seceding State is militarily disadvantaged would the feds, if somehow so inclined, dare cynically call it rebellion, thus mistakenly justifying its unleashing of superior fed military force against that State.