Letter: Let states secede when irreconcilable differences arise

November 26, 2013 

Letter: Let states secede when irreconcilable differences arise

Randy Schultz' column, "Does America need a Gettysburg Address for figurative civil war," (Opinion, Nov. 20) stands on two erroneous assumptions: (1) the Civil War was, on balance, good; and (2) it proved no state may secede.

Historians' estimates vary, but about 650,000 military personnel died and more were maimed. Untold thousands of civilians died. Property damage eliminated billions in value. OK, but the slaves were freed. That was not Lincoln's intent at the outset, but a tactic invented later in the war. War was unnecessary for this purpose. The rest of the civilized world already had, or was in the process of ending slavery politically, without war. (See Thomas J. DiLorenzo, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War.)

Peaceful secession is proper and should be honored. Remember, the American states seceded, justifiably, from England. Like marriage, when irreconcilable differences arise, the best option is peaceful separation.

The U.S. government is huge, exorbitantly expensive, and oppressively intrusive here and abroad. It is a danger to every American. If the people of any state were to divorce themselves from it, we should wish them well in their new independence. (See Daniel Waite Howe, Political History of Secession to the Beginning of the Civil War.)


Tri-City Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service