The Maine Secession Movement is now actively inviting

Maine Secession Movement | May 24, 2014 | Maine Secession Movement staff

[newnhdad]

I predict that this will be as successful at NH’s “Free State Project” which has led to higher property taxes and more democrats being elected.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"About 150 years ago there was a bit if a kerfuffle that seems to have settled whether a state can just walk out of the Union without approval from the other states. Regardless of what your state constitution may say."

What gave Lincoln that perceived authority was the attack on fort Sumner, we are nto talking about attacking anything, we are talking about a vote of the people to secede from the Union in accordance with our existing Constitution.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"So the first act of this new government is to steal the perimeter land from the rightful owners and give it to your buddies. Such fine Christian leadership! "

Nope, most of the land is owned by the state of Maine or some other govt entity. That land is what will be given away, the land in private ownership is where it will stay, land should not be owned by govt.

[DoodleDawg]

What gave Lincoln that perceived authority was the attack on fort Sumner, we are nto talking about attacking anything, we are talking about a vote of the people to secede from the Union in accordance with our existing Constitution.

Unless your actions are legal under the U.S. Constitution then it doesn't matter what your constitution says. And under the Constitution you just can't walk out.

"All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States." - Texas v White, 1868

[wideawake]

Again, you miss the core point.

It does not matter what Maine's Constitution says.

Why?

Because everything it says is ultimately subject to federal review.

What actually matters is what the US Constitution says.

Any luck on those statistics regarding the 300,000 new immigrants you'll need?

Also, any word on how your private army of 12,000 poll enforcers will be able to violate federal law on June 12, 2018 with impunity?

Or how your referendum will make it onto the ballot in the first place?

[Albion Wilde]

No reading comprehension; no knowledge of history, either. I pity you.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"Again, you miss the core point. It does not matter what Maine's Constitution says. Why? Because everything it says is ultimately subject to federal review."

Once again you do err, when the US accepted Maine as a state, in 1820, it accepted Maine with it's 1820 Constitution. Now there are some in the State Legislature that would like to amend both the preamble and A 1 sect 1&2, but that would take more than four years and it is only four years till the secession vote.

Look if you don't want to come to Maine and be free, that's fine, but quit trying to dissuade others who might like to be free. Like so many big govt reliant, you just keep beating and hoping to prevail with no facts or basis for fact on your side. We have been at this since 1985, do you really think you are coming up with anything new? Can you really be that vain?

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

Texas is, since the end of the civil war, conquered territory, Maine is not.

[DoodleDawg]

Texas is, since the end of the civil war, conquered territory, Maine is not.

LOL. You do live in a world of your own making, don't you?

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

Have you ever studied what happened in and to the Southern states after they surrendered? Can you find a time that Maine has suffered a similar fate? The taxes secession movement is nothing but smoke and mirrors, Texas can't even beginning to start a secession movement with a vote of the politicians and a signature of the guy who want s to be president, the governor.

[thesearethetimes...]

BookMark

[FatherofFive]

No reading comprehension; no knowledge of history, either.

You are so wrong on so many levels.

Try reading this:

Article 4
All civil, penal financial, economic, administrative, cultural, military, political, and other laws and regulations must be based on Christian criteria. This principle applies absolutely and generally to all articles of the Constitution as well as to all other laws and regulations...

Sound good to you? Sounds a lot like what you propose:
PREAMBLE. We the people of the Republic of Maine, in order to establish justice, insure tranquility, provide for our mutual defense, promote our common welfare, and secure to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of liberty, acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity, so favorable to the design; and, imploring God's aid and direction in its accomplishment, ... form ourselves from henceforth into a free and independent Christian Nation, by the style and title of the Republic of Maine and do ordain and establish the following Constitution for the government of the same.

I quoted the constitution of Iran, and I changed only one word. Maybe you can apply your massive intellect to figure out which one. You want to establish the same sort of tyranny. Just a different religion in charge.

[Albion Wilde]

What you need to do is back away from the computer and the topic, and examine why you are so deeply threatened and enraged by what is on my part a dry abstract intellectual discussion of how the proposed scheme could possibly work, even though it doesn't apply to me personally and I would be extremely unlikely to move there even in the .00009% chance that it could succeed; which I have already conceded upthread that it could happen when pigs fly.

You need to ask yourself why you are taking something so very personally that has not occured, that you would not be forced to participate in if it did occur, and would not affect your life in any way unless you are a signicant landowner in Maine. Because otherwise, you're taking the entire thing as a assault on you personally, when it is to me simply an abstract brainstorming about what the possibilities and pitfalls would be in trying to do such a thing, and what the principles are that are parallel or contrasting to the US Constitution. Creative people do this sort of discussion all the time before they develop a prototype. It's a relatively quite harmless activity. No need to get excited.

Because of your screen name, I took the time to try to clarify the issues in an attempt to relieve your concerns; because if you are a landowner in Maine, your concerns are .00009% warranted. But if in fact you are not a father, or if you have five babymamas, I've truly wasted my time. So farewell, and God bless you.

[SamAdams76]

A lot of spirited discussion on this thread but my contribution is this:

It is so cold up there in northern Maine. Just so, so cold. Even tonight, at the tail end of May, temperatures will be in the mid-30s tonight.

I write this about 400 miles to the south in northern Massachusetts where it has yet to reach 80 degrees this year (we have a chance this afternoon, if only the sun will come out). Where is all this "global warming" everybody speaks of?

If we are going to have a revolution, please let's make it a place where it will be warm.

[wideawake]

(1) What Maine's constitution says is irrelevant to the point at issue - what it said at the time of statehood or what it says today has no impact on the authority of the federal government to review that state constitution or anything enacted under it.

(2) Maine's constitution guarantees the right of Maine's citizens to alter the structure of their state government. It nowhere mentions any authority for Maine to secede from the Union. Treason is nowhere contemplated in the document.

(3) Even if treason were contemplated in the Maine constitution, its subordination to federal review would remain operative.

You are making the argument that the Maine constitution's provision for government reform can be interpreted as permitting secession from the Union. It cannot. Even if this flawed interpretation were to be pressed by Maine's judiciary, it would be rejected in federal court.

You are further arguing that Maine can unilaterally declare secession from the Union without review by the federal government. It cannot, by the plain words of the US Constitution. You are likely unaware of this, but Maine is a pure federal creation: it was formed out of Massachusetts for the express purpose of strengthening federal policy. So, whether one goes by original intent, or strict construction, or a positivist interpretation of both Maine and federal law, no act of secession by Maine can prevail.

And I don't think I'm coming up with anything new. Far from it. All this information is well known to any student of federal law.

Also, what you are proposing is not freedom - you are proposing a theocracy enforced by roaming bands of self-appointed roughnecks.

[annalex]

A milder version of Sabbath Law was in operation in Maine on my short memory; it was voted down in about 1990. Prior to that, the the stores were closed on Sunday, except perhaps pharmacies, and everybody survived probably better than they do now.

I am sure the transportation industry will be working at least enough to support external transport links. I do not see closing down airports and seaports a realistic proposition. But with reasonable exemptions, Sabbath laws are a good and practical thing.

***

I like this proposition in principle. It amazes me that what is clearly a restoration of the founding principles of every American state 250 years ago would be today sneered at as "taliban".

I am concerned with the "born-again" focus as it needlessly divides Christendom. I am Catholic; for me and for all Orthodox I know, some of them in Maine, and for many Protestants of mainline denominations, "born-again" means "baptized", and often, as a baby. Obviously, this definition of born-again won't be welcome in this Republic. And why? I do not intend a religious argument; I am merely questioning the wisdom of uninviting a large body of trinitarian Bible-believing Christians, who -- as French-descent largely Catholic Mainers -- are often native to the state and would support the principles of self-government, public religion and pro-life convictions of the proposed document?

[annalex]

how "You cannot shop on Sunday" is different from "You must wear a burka"

Easily. The former is a form of social organization involving not only shoppers but also the sales force and the store owners. It is then in the domain of government. What to wear is personal behavior, generally not in the domain of government.

But then you make a leap to "taliban". Taliban means shooting people in soccer stadiums for minor or imaginary transgressions of Sharia law. Burka is just a local traditional dress, locally understood to be a modest way to dress. In most locales in the US it is against the law to go naked. Are these laws also "taliban"?

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"I am concerned with the "born-again" focus as it needlessly divides Christendom. "

That is not nor ever was our intent, I was under the impression that RC's considered themselves Born Again.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

Time will tell.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"If we are going to have a revolution, please let's make it a place where it will be warm. "

we are not revolting, we are exercising our Constitutional right s to secede from the Union. The only violence we expect is from some minority groups in Maine who would rather burn down their apartments than just leave and apply for welfare in Massachusetts.