Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DemonDeac
Not factually accurate, but I fervently believe that it SHOULD be so. How can one say that they support freedom and liberty on one hand, and yet disallow (and promote armed aggression against!!!) those in a region who simply do not wish to be a part of a nation any longer.

Of course, the required support would have to be at least a super-majority, and other issues would need to be addressed... but to say that such a region or population has, as its ONLY recourse, armed insurrection seems anathema to a just and righteous nation. IMHO.

27 posted on 07/25/2008 7:29:42 AM PDT by Teacher317 (Thank you Dith Pran for showing us what Communism brings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Teacher317
How can one say that they support freedom and liberty on one hand, and yet disallow (and promote armed aggression against!!!) those in a region who simply do not wish to be a part of a nation any longer.

That was the contradiction in the Confederate States. They set themselves up as principled opponents of unwanted centralized power yet they refused the clear wishes of East Tennessee to remain loyal to the United States and wanted no part of the Confederacy.

33 posted on 07/25/2008 7:53:36 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson