FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[AKR]

Gorizia, Italy, Nova Gorica, Slovenija. Piazza Transalpina

I found this on the web. Has anyone ever wondered what that avatar of mine meant. The round thing that looks like a disc and says Italia 1947 2004 on one side and Slovenija on the other. Well this is it, on the link. Where you get to stand in 2 different countries at the same time. I've been here before of course. Both sides are beautiful. The link is from the esperience of someone else who has been there.

http://www.igougo.com/journal-j74213-Go ... ID:1373395

Btw when said the names Gorizia and Gorica are almost the same. The Slovenian c is the same as the Italian z. The difference is that the Italian has the i after the z in which the SLovene doesn't and it Italian the emphasis in pronounciation is on the last vowel where in Slovenian it is on the first vowel.

[texasmr2]

Does it mean the same thing as when I put one boot in Texas and the other in Lousiana?

[AKR]

Here are more links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piazza_della_Transalpina

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piazza_della_Transalpina (In Italian but it has some extra good pictures that the English Wkipedia link above doesn'r have).

[AKR]

Does it mean the same thing as when I put one boot in Texas and the other in Lousiana?

No because both Texas and Lousiana are in the same country.

[texasmr2]

I took a shot but actually it may very well be the same thing since Texas still holds the right to succeed and once again become it's own nation.

[The_Stig_Money]

Does it mean the same thing as when I put one boot in Texas and the other in Lousiana?

LOL dont ever compare Texas to Lousiana

You can be deported for that

I wanted to stand in the 4 corners but the wait was to long

[bud]

Standing over imaginary lines is fun huh

[Juliet P]

I took a shot but actually it may very well be the same thing since Texas still holds the right to succeed and once again become it's own nation.

I'm sure everyone has the right to succeed, but I think you mean to say 'right to secede'... Although I'm pretty sure that it's a myth.

[texasmr2]

I took a shot but actually it may very well be the same thing since Texas still holds the right to succeed and once again become it's own nation.

I'm sure everyone has the right to succeed, but I think you mean to say 'right to secede'... Although I'm pretty sure that it's a myth.

The US Constitution is silent on the issue of secession. There is no provision in the Texas Constitution (current or former) that reserves the right of secession, but it does state that "Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States" ... not to the President of the US or even the Congress of the US.

Both original and current Texas Constitutions state that political power is inherent in the people and (just as the Declaration of Independence declares) "the people have the right to alter their government in such manner as they might think proper."

Texas and Hawaii are two states that were once recognized as independent nations, before choosing to join the Union. Their voluntary decision to join the Union did not come with an explicit agreement that they could never leave.

Some people claim that the Civil War proved that secession is illegal. Whether one was in favor of the North or the South, all that war actually "proved" is that a state or group of states can be militarily forced to continue being a part of a group. Superior strength does not prove morality or legality as any citizen of the former Soviet Union can attest.

Some people are under the mistaken impression that the US Supreme Court decision in Texas v. White "proved" that secession is unconstitutional. Actually, that decision was not based on any precedent or anything in the Constitution and was in direct conflict with the actions of the then-President Grant who had to sign an act to "re-admit" Texas into the Union and allow them to send Representatives back to Congress. If Texas had never left, as the Court declared, it would not have been required to be "re-admitted" and Grant would not have needed to sign the declaration. This is a conflict that has never been fully cleared up.

Bottom line: There is no law forbidding or allowing secession. If Texas or any other state decides to secede, the resulting peaceful separation or war will depend not on law, but on the will of whomever happens to be Commander-in-Chief at the time.


One can also argue, and constitutional scholars certainly have, that the 'readmission' of Texas to the union did not violate the Supreme Court's decision in Texas vs. White...it was is superfluous, and indeed, did not, in and of itself violate, and was not contrary, to the Texas vs. White ruling. Simply speaking, there was no precedent for handling this situation. The readmission of Texas in early 1870 came just a short few months after Texas vs. White, and Congress and the President did not forsee the long-term implications of the Supreme Court decision. Just like there is no explicit wording in the Constitution forbidding secession, there is no wording in the Constitution specifically outlining the statutory process for the readmission of states.
Because of this, if state's rights proponents continue to argue that a state's right to secede is implied because they joined the union as 'independent states', a strong argument can also be made that an indissoulable union was also implied in the Constitution. Membership in a union does not dimish in importance or totality a state's sovereignity. That's the whole point of federalism. However, it does imply relinquishing some power to the national government. Indeed, federalism is 'shared' power, but it is not 'equal' power, at least in the example of the US. Clearly national dominance was designed into the structure of the Constitution.

[madbrad]

I live in Ontario so don't get me stared on the separatists.

[darwin dali]

Even tiny Switzerland had its spats about 40 years ago

[Irv the Swerve]

There is a bridge in between Brazil and Argentina, not quite a footstep apart more like a 100.

[madbrad]

There are thousands of miles of Canada/US border you can straddle unmolested.

[texasmr2]

I straddle a 'borderline' every day between being mentaly competent and just plain cookoo for cocoa puffs

[darwin dali]

I straddle a 'borderline' every day between being mentaly competent and just plain cookoo for cocoa puffs

I had a hunch