Well, golly. I have several times in this thread cited Article, section, and clause. Apparently you missed those. So I'll give you the thumbnail sketch:
Article VI says that the Constitution is superior to any state laws or constitutions that might say something contrary to the Constitution. Acts of secession are by definition contrary to the Constitution, and hence they are disallowed by the Constitution.
Also, you'll note that Article VI requires the elected officials of each state to swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. Among other things, it means that they are bound not to pass laws or amendments that violate the Constitution. Seeing as how secession explicitly abrogates the Constitutional bound that was ratified by each state, acts of secession obviously do not uphold the Constitution. Thus, elected officials cannot constitutionally secessd.
Article and clause.
As for your silly little insults, please don't.
Walt
As to insults, your whole silly train of "logic" is an insult to the intelligence of anyone who has read the Constitution. Since you can't cite Article section and clause for anything you're claiming, it's obvious to anyone with two brain cells to rub together that you've simply accepted the ridiculous positions of several unhanged traitors from the 19th century and you're pretending that the proof of what they claimed is right before our eyes in the text of the Constitution.
That's absurd and you know it unless you're mentally unbalanced. Making absurd statements such as the ones you've made, then claiming that the plain text of the Constitution reads as your assertions require that it reads is the work of a disturbed mind.
Boiled down to its essence, your argument is this: "the Constitution simply must contain what I say it contains because if it doesn't I'll look like a fool." Well, son, you look like a fool because the document contains not a single syllable to prohibit the withdrawal of a state, nor does it contain any grant of authority to the federal government to coerce a state by miltary force to remain in the union.
Now, defend this piece of fantasy from your vanity:
"The individual states are bound to remain part of the United States, both by the ratification of the Constitution and by their oaths of affirmation to support the Constitution."
This is supposed to be your grand summation and it's pure unsupported balderdash. Show in the text of the Constitution where the states are so bound. There is nothing binding upon any state which doesn't appear in the original articles or in any amendment. If conditions could be created out of thin air from the imaginations of those who wished that those conditions existed in the document, then no Constitution would be necessary or even possible. Most absurd of all is your attempt to establish that the states swore some oath or other. How on earth does a state swear an oath?
It's amazing that this thread ran to over 600 responses when you've been utterly unable the entire time to defend a single one of your bizarre contentions. I'll make you a deal, though. You defend your "summation" as I've quoted it to you, using the text of the Constitution and showing the specific language which backs your assertions, and I'll accept the rest of your assertions unquestioned.