assateague wrote:The Supreme Court also said slavery was fine, women can't vote, and the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to states, only the fed. Using the SCOTUS as reasoning is lazy logic.
No, what is a lazy logic is confusing what "is" with what might "happen someday". You might as well say that as some point in the future gravity is going to turn off at 4:00 pm, during baseball season and since it's unprovable, it supports your argument.
I have the courts, the Executive branch, Congress and the most devastating war in US history war on my side of the argument. You have "...it could happen..." Brilliant.
And saying "the Union won't let you go" hart qualifies as "you may not go".
Haaa haaa! Wow.
That guy in Silence of the Lambs wouldn't let the girl in the well go, either. But that doesn't mean she didn't have a right to go.
Haaa haaa! Double wow.
No state has the right to unilaterally leave. That's final. Don't confuse self determination with what you can do without repercussion. If you really believe that a state can leave, then start a secession movement in your state, clearly state to the USA that you are going to leave the Union. Then proceed to the line where your entire state gets stomped into the ground and we get all your women. Instead of the Marshall Plan you'll get the U.S. Marshall plan and become our very own Palestine.
Honest question- if a state is not free to leave the union, what makes it any different than the former Soviet Union?
Honest answer. Because the USA and former USSR are not equivalent. Either in location, structure, history, language, culture or anything other than the people there use oxygen and have to eat just like everyone else... Plus, Ukrainian women are hot.
All this for a bowl of borscht.