This thought struck me a couple of weeks ago, that if we have the right to oust a tyrannical government then any laws against insurrection, while they obviously have the force of government behind them are morally void and so "should" be unenforceable.
Some will argue that the right to secede or rebel is not found in our Constitution but I do not think that it right. As it is clearly a right stated in the Declaration of Independence, then I argue that the right must be one of those "other" rights reserved to us and mentioned specifically in the 9th Amendment.
Yes, I understand that this thread is all about the theoretical but I am curious to know how others understand this...the contradiction between a Constitution that should allow rebellion and at the same time...allows the government to suppress it..
Some will argue that the right to secede or rebel is not found in our Constitution but I do not think that it right. As it is clearly a right stated in the Declaration of Independence, then I argue that the right must be one of those "other" rights reserved to us and mentioned specifically in the 9th Amendment.
Yes, I understand that this thread is all about the theoretical but I am curious to know how others understand this...the contradiction between a Constitution that should allow rebellion and at the same time...allows the government to suppress it..