members, click to sign in..

4,503 active users!!Bandwidth
TUESDAY
NOV 25, 2014
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
BroadcastersNew Stuff!
Local Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -17 min
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
Photos
Stores
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

 
RELIGION, CURRENT EVENTS, TECHNOLOGY Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
FRONT PAGE  |  11/25/2014
Choice News TUESDAY, NOV 13, 2012  |  180 comments
The petition to let Texas secede from the U.S. to be reviewed by the White House

As of 3:40 p.m. ET, more than 25,000 Texans have already signed the petition on The White House website to let Texas peacefully secede from United States of America and “create its own NEW government.”

The petition, created on Nov. 9, argues for secession.


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
blog.chron.com

  START  
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  The Christian and Government • Pastor John MacArthur | 6/27/2009

   11/25/14  |  White House Quietly Releases Plans For 3,415 Regulations Ahead... • 1 comments
   11/16/14  |  More Federal Agencies Are Using Undercover Operations
   11/15/14  |  Tax Revenues Set Record for October • 6 comments
   10/24/14  |  Buying sex to be outlawed, after historic NI vote • 2 comments
   10/01/14  |  $8 Trillion Annual Debt Churn • 4 comments
MORE RELATED ( GOVERNMENT ) NEWS | MORE..
   11/20/14  |  Rick Warren on gay marriage: 'The Church must not cave in' • 34 comments
   11/18/14  |  SermonAudio Tip: Enjoy SermonAudio via Chromecast on your TV! • 9 comments
   11/18/14  |  Final approval given to women bishops at COE General Synod • 5 comments
   11/18/14  |  BioLogos pushes to change the way Christians read Genesis • 9 comments
   11/17/14  |  Christian booted from National Cathedral speaks out • 53 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   06/02/14  |  A Letter to SermonAudio From a Missionary to Haiti • 10 comments
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 37 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
   01/01/14  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 29 comments
   12/10/13  |  SermonAudio Broadcaster Loses Historic Church Building To Fire • 3 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   11/25/14  |  IRS sued for monitoring U.S. churches • 1 comments
   11/25/14  |  Colleges' new challenge: Keeping students in school
   11/25/14  |  1,000 evangelical pastors urged to run for political office • 41 comments
   11/25/14  |  White House Quietly Releases Plans For 3,415 Regulations Ahead... • 1 comments
   11/25/14  |  A legal history lesson in the same-sex marriage debate
OTHER RECENT NEWS | MORE..

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 180 user comment(s)
News Item11/16/12 11:22 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Lincoln did not free the slaves in areas "under rebellion" merely out of cynical political calculus. Being a lawyer, he knew that the Taney Court (c.f. Dred Scott) would throw out any case of unilateral federal emancipation unless it was very narrowly justified as a military expedient. This is why the Proclamation was very pedantic, which disappointed idealistic abolitionists. Lincoln knew that further action on slavery had to be by Congress. Before the Proclamation, there were cases where Lincoln even countermanded Union commanders' orders (e.g. Fremont) to free slaves, he was that cautious.

He did try to promote compensated emancipation in Delaware, but it was completely rejected. He did not appreciate enough that slavery was a culture, not merely an economic system. Slaveowners would not be bought out.

Now I think the South had a plausible Constitutional case for slavery. But they had no Biblical case whatever.

180

News Item11/16/12 4:13 PM
Marty | Usa  Find all comments by Marty
Rex Lex? Did I mix that up? I meant "The King is the Law."
179

News Item11/16/12 4:09 PM
Marty | Usa  Find all comments by Marty
Jim,

Democracy or not, I'm against rebellion because it's in essence satanic. However, if government is based on a contract, the exercise of contractual rights is lawful. Unlike the world of antiquity, things are no longer Lex Rex.

178

News Item11/16/12 4:06 PM
Bob | USA  Find all comments by Bob
That was my point, there was much, much more to the war then just slavery yet ask the avg citizen and they will say it was just about slavery.

Same goes for this sucession movement...it's not just about Obama, it's about much, much more.

177

News Item11/16/12 3:00 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
Bob wrote:
What of Lincoln's emancipation proclaimation? i.e. Lincoln freed all the slaves where he did not have a right to and yet held them captive where he had the right to release them.
Lincoln was opposed to slavery, but that isn't the prime reason why he fought the war. Freeing the slaves in Rebel States, but not in States favorable to the Union, was a strategic move.
176

News Item11/16/12 2:44 PM
Bob | USA  Find all comments by Bob
What of Lincoln's emancipation proclaimation? i.e. Lincoln freed all the slaves where he did not have a right to and yet held them captive where he had the right to release them.
175

News Item11/16/12 2:17 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Ah, Marty, I liked most of your comments until the very end. As Lincoln and others pointed out, no one has the right to rebel in a democracy. The North proved that point, so that is settled anyway. Also one has to remember, Rendering To Caesar---A Biblical Perspective On Government.
Jefferson wa
Thomas Jefferson and Slavery wrote:
At the time of the American Revolution, Jefferson was actively involved in legislation that he hoped would result in slavery’s abolition. In 1778, he drafted a Virginia law that prohibited the importation of enslaved Africans. In 1784, he proposed an ordinance that would ban slavery in the Northwest territories. But Jefferson always maintained that the decision to emancipate slaves would have to be part of a democratic process; abolition would be stymied until slaveowners consented to free their human property together in a large-scale act of emancipation. To Jefferson, it was anti-democratic and contrary to the principles of the American Revolution for the federal government to enact abolition or for only a few planters to free their slaves.
from, Thomas Jefferson & Slavery
174

News Item11/16/12 12:58 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
jpw wrote:
that slavery idea was pretty diabolical, no doubt. those slaves, I'm sure they wanted life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
quite an idea, ain't it?
True, an idea their similarly pigmented countrymen that sold them didn't hold dear either.
173

News Item11/16/12 12:43 PM
jpw  Find all comments by jpw
that slavery idea was pretty diabolical, no doubt. those slaves, I'm sure they wanted life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

quite an idea, ain't it?

172

News Item11/16/12 9:36 AM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Christopher000 wrote:
You guys are pretty smart.
Thanks; Marty is the most knowledgeable on this subject I've encountered here. I believe in a limited federal gov't too. But none of this would've impressed any slave in 1860. To them, it was as Samuel Johnson said: "How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of negroes?" Debate over the term “perpetual union“ would've seemed petty & ridiculous to anyone with their problems.

And the North wasn't all that nice to former slaves, either. Segregation continued until the 1950s, & not just in the South. John Brown was the only American I know of in the Civil War era who treated black people as social equals; other abolitionists, few of whom were orthodox Christians, held to idiotic theories of racial inferiority.

If this was the kind of people we were when the Bible was widely read & known, imagine what we'll become w/o it.

171

News Item11/16/12 7:27 AM
Christopher000 | Rhode Island  Find all comments by Christopher000
You guys blow me away with the knowledge you have. Wow. I was surprised that Angela didn't jump in as well because she's so well informed.

You guys are pretty smart.

170

News Item11/16/12 7:25 AM
Marty | USA  Find all comments by Marty
The last article I posted is a helpful tool. Here's another article someone recommended, but I haven't had a chance to read yet (work, family life, etc):

http://www.ditext.com/livingston/tradition.html

(I do not endorse this article, since I haven't read it, but you can get a jump start if you have time - I plan to read it later).

That aside, I have no roots in the south. I spent most of my life in the Land of Lincoln, and some in Springfield's surrounding area. I have nothing for or against Lincoln. The Temple of Zeus (i.e. Lincoln Memorial) they made for him hasn't changed the fact that he is still a man, capable of being wrong sometimes (e.g. with respect to faith, his family is known for Spiritualism). My church, abolitionist historically, left the south over slavery. I have no horse in this race, no desire to justify kidnapping and racial slavery. I'm only interested in sticking up for one of the means of liberty God has given us... the separation of powers. I don't want history to be changed, since Christ is King over history and the course of nations. I do value a decentralized government and the tools used to make it happen (e.g. secession rights, gun rights, etc). A central government with nothing to fear is a dangerous thing.

169

News Item11/15/12 10:13 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Sure, but where are they as sovereign in the Constitution? That was the whole problem with the AofC, & why it had to be revised.

I am aware that perpetuity could be construed that way plausibly. Evidently a lot of Northerners were willing to die for a perpetual Union (not abolition). Call it mistaken if you like, but don't call it dishonest sophistry. It is a subtle issue.

Frankly, after studying Southern slavery, I have no sympathy for the South even if you're correct. If they really had a case for their species of constitutionalism, they should've picked a better cause than chattel slavery to fight over, for nothing else, be they tariffs, the Morrill Act, homesteading, or the Pac RR Act, was as morally plain as slavery. I suspect that even now, few white Americans realize how awful it is to have your entire future stolen from you for no other reason than because you, or your parents, were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Even Soviet zeks had more hope: relative freedom in 10 or 25 yrs. The Bible says a lot more about how to treat people than it does about political theory. Before God, I'd rather be wrong about the Constitution than wrong about stealing another's life.

168

News Item11/15/12 7:56 PM
marty | usa  Find all comments by marty
Neil,

In good faith, I complement you for doing that research, in order to add more to this conversation. It's commendable.

That said, why interpret a legal document to be more draconian, causing it to contradict an early article?

Notice article II: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

See that? Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and indep. After that, upon close examination, there is a break with the word "and." Only the powers, jurisdictions, and rights can be delegated away, but sovereignty, freedom and independ. are not granted away.

So, what of this "perpetual" business? A fair question, one that I can answer with a less contradictory reading of the Articles. Now, in law, are certain legal entities perpetual... yes, corporations have an indefinite life. Now, can shareholders leave a corporation? Yes, they can. Just because someone can leave an entity, doesn't mean it isn't perpetual. The Articles were perpetual in that they didn't need to be renewed.

Here the author takes a different route than me on the Articles(point 9): http://www.endusmilitarism.org/secessionlegality.html

167

News Item11/15/12 7:39 PM
T Jefferson | 1787  Find all comments by T Jefferson
"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary to the political world as storms to the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government."
166

News Item11/15/12 6:41 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Marty wrote:
(A). The Constitution doesn't delegate session to the Federal government (as it does with accession), nor does it prohibit session (B). Conclusion: session is a state power (C). If it was otherwise, he'd have no reason to even mention his homemade "universal law." Now, why don't you want to talk about 1776. I'd like to see if you are consistent or if you tailor arguments as the mood finds you.
Clever sophistry, but note XIII in, of all places, the Articles of Confederation:
"And the Articles ... shall be inviolably observed by every state, and the union shall be perpetual; nor shall any alteration at any time hereafter be made in any of them; unless such alteration be agreed to in a congress of the united states, and be afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every state."

But you would have me believe that the Constitution, with its stronger central gov't plan, opens the door to unilateral secession despite its writers' claim that it "formed a more perfect Union." It is more perfect by allowing unilateral rupture to a "perpetual" relationship? Absurd! Your deduction contradicts the declared intent of the Founders, in *both* documents.

165

News Item11/15/12 4:55 PM
Marty | Usa  Find all comments by Marty
The 10th reserves all non delegated and non forbidden powers to the States and people (A). The Constitution doesn't delegate session to the Federal government (as it does with accession), nor does it prohibit session (B). Conclusion: session is a state power (C). If it was otherwise, he'd have no reason to even mention his homemade "universal law." Now, why don't you want to talk about 1776. I'd like to see if you are consistent or if you tailor arguments as the mood finds you.
164

News Item11/15/12 4:45 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Marty wrote:
Hence the reason why the 10th is so damaging to that idea.
Is it? I don't follow. You're claiming secession as an implied 10th Amendment right. I don't see how language concerning accession proves that its opposite is legitimate.

I do not care to go off on a rabbit trail about 1776 & all that.

163

News Item11/15/12 4:42 PM
Marty | Usa  Find all comments by Marty
Hence the reason why the 10th is so damaging to that idea. Neil, civil war aside for a minute, what's your take on our Revolution? Do you think it treason, and if not, why?
162

News Item11/15/12 4:34 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Marty wrote:
It did mention growth after all (i.e. accession)...
Yet it doesn't mention succession, presumably at least as troublesome as accession, so am I to believe the writers considered secession a realistic possibility, so ordinary a matter it was hardly worth mentioning? Call this an Argument from Silence if you will, but the assymetry is striking.
161
There are a total of 180 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | last
Last PostTotal
1,000 evangelical pastors urged to run for political office
unprofitable servant from georgia: " mike who was it said 'if nominated i will..."
-13 min 41 
National Guard summoned to Ferguson
jim lincoln from nebraska: " jim lincoln apparently, you can just repeat the..."
-25 min 19 
CNN Poll Reveals America's Most Agreed Upon Sin
jim lincoln from nebraska: "i should have added this one :alert: gil rugh said..."
-7 hrs 27 


Decadence, Dysfunctionality...

Kevin Swanson
Gay Mirage - Watershed Issue?

Methodists & Baptists Split?
Current Events
Generations Radio
Play! | MP3 | RSS


Stephen Hyde
Sin: Confessed & Forgiven

Hope Chapel Redhill
Sunday - PM
Play! | MP3

Bob Vincent
Defending the Faith

Rejecting Atheism
Grace Presbyterian Church
Play! | MP3

Ken Wimer
If the Lord Will

Gospel According to Luke
Shreveport Grace Church
Video!Play! | MP4

Ken Wimer
Chosen To Salvation

Radio Broadcast
Shreveport Grace Church
Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
Lowest Puritan Hard Drive Price Ever!

For A Very Short Time We Are Off­er­ing A Shock­ingly Low Price. Click To See How Low!
www.puritandownloads.com/pu..

Sermon:
God's Word Does not Fail
Danny Bond






                   
I am a Bible bigot. I follow it in all things both great and small. ... John Wesley

City: Las Vegas, NV
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
Church App
Android New!
Church App
Kindle + Nook New!
BlackBerry
Windows Mobile, Nokia
Chromecast TV
ROKU TV
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

FOLLOW
Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
HIFI Option
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI | Domains
Favorites
QR Codes
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword
SOAP API

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
SermonAudio.com is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.

Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads
CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Copyright © 2014 SermonAudio.com.