Lakota indians renounce US treaties

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
Derek Ortt

#41 Postby Derek Ortt » Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:47 am

the 9th and 10th amendment does NOT state that a state can secede. Nowhere is that stated.


No sure where that intrepretation of hose amendments comes from. All the 10th amendment states that power not delegated to the federal government is reserved for the states. However, secession is not a right. Nothing in amendment 9 either
0 likes   

User avatar
gtalum
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 4749
Age: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:48 pm
Location: Bradenton, FL
Contact:

Re:

#42 Postby gtalum » Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:57 am

Derek Ortt wrote:the 9th and 10th amendment does NOT state that a state can secede. Nowhere is that stated.


No sure where that intrepretation of hose amendments comes from. All the 10th amendment states that power not delegated to the federal government is reserved for the states. However, secession is not a right. Nothing in amendment 9 either


The US Constitution grants rights and powers to the federal government. Nowhere does the US Constitution grant the federal government the power to prevent states from seceding. So point 1: the federal government has no right to stop states from seceding.

The 9th Amendment states "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." "The people" is by most constitutional scholars considered to extend to states.

Thus rights not enumerated in the constitution are not to be denied the people or the states unless those rights are specifically forbidden by the constitution or an amendment. As has been noted, nowhere does teh US COnstitution forbid secession.

The 10th Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Thus the powers not granted to the federal government by the constitution nor specifically forbidden from the states by the constitution are held solely by the states and the people. The power to secede, as mentioned, is not forbidden to the states, nor is the power to prevent secession granted to the federal government.

It is absolutely necessary to accept that the constitution is the only document that grants rights to the federal government. Since the right to prevent secession is not granted, the federal government does not have the constitutionally-granted power to prevent secession.

As you have noted earlier in this thread, though, the federal government did steal the right of secession from the states through military force. And since then, they have usurped and stolen many other powers not granted it by the US Constitution.

The US was formed as a confederation of sovereign states and not as the top-heavy, monolithic, and unwieldy power-hungry bureaucracy that we have now.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#43 Postby Derek Ortt » Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:06 pm

but nowhere is the right of secession granted either.

But lets say that secession is legal. I would consider them an enemy to be crushed and conquered. My allegience is to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not to Florida, which is a part of the USA
0 likes   

Coredesat

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#44 Postby Coredesat » Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:38 pm

Derek Ortt wrote:but nowhere is the right of secession granted either.

But lets say that secession is legal. I would consider them an enemy to be crushed and conquered. My allegience is to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not to Florida, which is a part of the USA


It was already stated that Native American reservations aren't states. They aren't subject to provisions of the Constitution that apply to states.

By your logic, I wouldn't ever let a friend of mine who happens to live on one of the reservations in question meet you - I'd fear for his safety.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#45 Postby Derek Ortt » Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:47 pm

While the reservations are not part of a particular state (yes, New York State, this applies to you as well and your efforts to tax Native Americans), they still are a part of the United States. Since I do not believe in secession, I have no choice but to stand by my opinions
0 likes   

User avatar
Ptarmigan
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 5313
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:06 pm

Re:

#46 Postby Ptarmigan » Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:53 pm

The 9th Amendment goes:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


The 10th Amendment goes:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


9th Amendment reinforces the Bill of Rights. The 10th Amendment is about state's right. As far as I know, there is nowhere in the Constitution that says anything about secession. Last time such a thing happened was during the Civil War, when the South formed Confederate States of American or CSA. As for American Indians and reservations, that is under Department of Interior, which would be federal jurisdiction.

I know in Texas, the Alabama-Coushatta tribed wanted to open a casino, but were not allowed because of Texas law forbidded casinos. They argued that it will be established in Indian reservation land that is under the federal government, not state of Texas. However a judge ruled against the Indians.
0 likes   

User avatar
azsnowman
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 8591
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 8:56 pm
Location: Pinetop Arizona. Elevation 7102' (54 miles west of NM border)

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#47 Postby azsnowman » Sat Dec 29, 2007 9:20 am

Coredesat wrote:
Derek Ortt wrote:but nowhere is the right of secession granted either.

But lets say that secession is legal. I would consider them an enemy to be crushed and conquered. My allegience is to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not to Florida, which is a part of the USA


It was already stated that Native American reservations aren't states. They aren't subject to provisions of the Constitution that apply to states.

By your logic, I wouldn't ever let a friend of mine who happens to live on one of the reservations in question meet you - I'd fear for his safety.


I've lived on reservations ALL of my 48 yrs and I can guarantee you one thing, he wouldn't stand a CHANCE, it would be the replay of "Custers Last Stand!"

Derek...this is the kind of hatered for Native Americans that makes me SICK to my stomach :x Come on out to Arizona and make this statement!
0 likes   

User avatar
gtalum
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 4749
Age: 49
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 3:48 pm
Location: Bradenton, FL
Contact:

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#48 Postby gtalum » Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:19 am

Derek Ortt wrote:but nowhere is the right of secession granted either.

But lets say that secession is legal. I would consider them an enemy to be crushed and conquered. My allegience is to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, not to Florida, which is a part of the USA


Unfortunately, the whole "my country, right or wrong" mentality is what leads to totalitarianism.

You're right, though, in that the feds will probably go back on their treaties with the Lakota and the native americans will get screwed yet again.
0 likes   

Derek Ortt

#49 Postby Derek Ortt » Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:38 am

I do NOT hate Native Americans, az

I hate secesionists
0 likes   

User avatar
MGC
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 5899
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2003 9:05 pm
Location: Pass Christian MS, or what is left.

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#50 Postby MGC » Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:05 pm

If I recall correctly, Texas when it joined the Union retained the right to leave the Union and form its own country. I don't remember where I read this though.....MGC
0 likes   

User avatar
HURAKAN
Professional-Met
Professional-Met
Posts: 46086
Age: 38
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 4:34 pm
Location: Key West, FL
Contact:

Re: Lakota indians renounce US treaties

#51 Postby HURAKAN » Sun Dec 30, 2007 8:09 pm

MGC wrote:If I recall correctly, Texas when it joined the Union retained the right to leave the Union and form its own country. I don't remember where I read this though.....MGC


The point of no return!

http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/exhibits/ann ... ion11.html

Neither Texas, nor any other state can legaly leave the union.
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests