In response to:

Parting Company

Carl469 Wrote: Nov 29, 2012 5:23 PM
There are always going to be "irreconcileable differences," no matter how much one devolves political authority. Even in a union of two people -- also known as "marriage" -- one will get division. That doesn't mean one races to divorce court. Likewise, the fact that there are cultural differences within, as well as between, so-called Red and Blue states doesn't mean we can't work out those differences. The secessionists, Williams included, haven't even remotely made a case for national divorce.
c5c5c5 Wrote: Dec 25, 2012 3:11 PM

The words, "irreconcileable differences" means that there are problems and points of view that CANNOT be resolved. If one or both parties to the marriage will NOT keep the vows or promote working on the differences to a solution, then it might be a good thing to "race to divorce court."

You fail to grasp the meaning of Dr Williams analogy. Half this country wants to control the other half and they have no intention of compromise. Why then cannot the half that wants to be left alone leave? Why must they be forced to submit to the will of the other half? That is a very good case for national divorce.
For decades, it has been obvious that there are irreconcilable differences between Americans who want to control the lives of others and those who wish to be left alone. Which is the more peaceful solution: Americans using the brute force of government to beat liberty-minded people into submission or simply parting company? In a marriage, where vows are ignored and broken, divorce is the most peaceful solution. Similarly, our constitutional and human rights have been increasingly violated by a government instituted to protect them. Americans who support constitutional abrogation have no intention of mending their ways.

Since Barack Obama's re-election, hundreds...