Celebrating the Fourth of July is celebrating the idea of secession.
It celebrates the founding of this nation!
Celebrating is for what you have gained or accomplished. Or to another year of an effort you are proud of. So secessions has nothing to do with the question. If you ask: is celebrating the fourth of July your way of showing you support for secession
Then the %'s of people that don't have the Same knowledge you do can look it up and make an informed answer without being deemed ignorant. You would look like you are expanding people's opportunities to learn .some people are not a born know it all
I think the Fourth of July is celebrating the fact that America is now an independent nation. Even though that did come about by secession, the day is celebrating a new nation.
That came through secession.
It's not inherently bad, I don't get why people are so scared of the idea
Well of course. If you said no you must've failed history. It's in the title of the holiday lol!?
How do 37% of people not understand what secession means
Boiled down to its essence in the United States, yes. Independence Day for other countries might have a little different heritage, and thereby, significance.
But here, yes, independence = secession.
No rebel, just no.
Yes, like it or not
Secession (derived from the Latin term secessio) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, or especially a political entity. Threats of secession can also be a strategy for achieving more limited goals.
That's what the colonies did and what states can do today
The state's cannot secede. The 13 colonies were "virtually represented" by parliament. In other words they were not represented, thus justifying the revolution. For a state to secede they must lack representation.
I don't see that stipulation written anywhere. People with your viewpoint existed in the 18th century. Yet, here we are.
Secession is an inherent right. That's really the end of it.
I don't see the right to secession against a republic written anywhere either.
Neither is the right to self defense but that's inherent as well.
Just let it go skinner. How many people would you kill just to keep all the puzzle pieces together?
The difference is there are centuries of legal precedent against territory leaving the union.
Skinner, the "legal precedent" consists of the unconstitutinal slaughter by the government of 650,000 people. Read the articles of ratification of the states - they believed they had a right to get out. They had already seceeded three times by 1787.
The colonies seceeded from the Dominion of New England in 1689. They seceeded from the British Empire, and they seceeded from the Articles of Confederation. They did not see the union as being unbreakable, or they never would have joined it.
And the lack of direct representation was not the sole reason for secession. Far from it. One vote (or 13) in parliament would have changed nothing from a practical perspective.
The revolution was justified by the infringements on rights.
The Dominion doesn't count because they still were part of the same nation (Britain) just not the catholic order that ruled the region. The Articles is more of a civics change than anything else.
Nut: the point about secession for rights is absolutely correct, however, that doesn't mean secession should be legal in a represented region.
Yes. And freedom...so there is no reason to celebrate anymore.
I was waiting for the RebelFury Independance Day poll...