Mindless Obedience, Anyone?
Recently brought to our attention was a quasi-anonymous bulletin board posting by one "TVC184" in response to our FAQ, which read:
Turning both the law and logic on their heads, our writer ("TVC184") is suggesting that the absence of any constitutional provision either for or against secession somehow renders secession a prohibited and "bogus" notion, and that unconditional "obedience" to presidents and Congress is the perpetual obligation of Texans.
Frankly, the very idea that we are somehow obligated to "obey" a president and/or a Congress that openly defy the clear limitations imposed by the Constitution is unmitigated evidence of shameful ignorance — the same kind that mindlessly acquiesces to the falsehood that the US Constitution "gives power" to presidents and Congress, instead of delegating it on behalf of the people, as both the US and Texas Constitutions explicitly state.
Our "TVC184" is also apparently ignorant of the fact that secession is how both the United States and Texas Republics were born. Secession is rendered neither "illegal" nor "bogus" by either of their respective Constitutions, and in fact the founding documents of both entities clearly indicate that people have a right — an obligation — to change their government if they're not happy with the current one (and it's not referring to "voting").
"The very first question shows that the right to secede is bogus. As it states, there is nothing in the Texas Constitution that allows such a secession.The first thing we noticed was the writer's apparently mindless obsession with the arbitrary (but false) notion that the Constitution says we're required to "follow" or "obey" the president and Congress — particularly when they aren't obeying the Constitution. The fact is, Americans (the president and Congress especially) are required obey the rule of law — not men. But the writer of the above comments mindlessly embraces the notion that we're all obliged to "follow" and "obey" the president and Congress instead of demand that they "follow" and "obey" the Constitution.
"The answer then states that Article 1 Section 1 states that we have to follow the United States Constitution. The answer quickly tries to explain this away as saying that they only have to follow the Constution [sic] and not the US President or Congress.
"Well duhhhhhh.... the US Constitution is what gives the Congress and President their power. The slanted answer is that we have to follow the US Constitution.... except the parts we don't like.
"I don't buy it. The first answer clearly says that no such power allowing Texas to secede exists in the Texas Constitution. Then the political spin starts where they can obey the US Constitution but somehow ignore the President and Congress listed in that very document. Hmmm....."
Turning both the law and logic on their heads, our writer ("TVC184") is suggesting that the absence of any constitutional provision either for or against secession somehow renders secession a prohibited and "bogus" notion, and that unconditional "obedience" to presidents and Congress is the perpetual obligation of Texans.
Frankly, the very idea that we are somehow obligated to "obey" a president and/or a Congress that openly defy the clear limitations imposed by the Constitution is unmitigated evidence of shameful ignorance — the same kind that mindlessly acquiesces to the falsehood that the US Constitution "gives power" to presidents and Congress, instead of delegating it on behalf of the people, as both the US and Texas Constitutions explicitly state.
Our "TVC184" is also apparently ignorant of the fact that secession is how both the United States and Texas Republics were born. Secession is rendered neither "illegal" nor "bogus" by either of their respective Constitutions, and in fact the founding documents of both entities clearly indicate that people have a right — an obligation — to change their government if they're not happy with the current one (and it's not referring to "voting").