Secession is justified (morally)

Thank you for accepting. I would like if we did not go in too deep on the definition of morality, as that is not the focus of the debate. It is rather our focus on the natural rights of people and whether a state can even have a natural right. Secession and AnarchyLincoln stated in 1861 during his inaugural address:" Plainly the central idea of secession is the essence of anarchy. A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to despotism. Unanimity is impossible. The rule of a minority, as a permanent arrangement, is wholly inadmissible; so that, rejecting the majority principle, anarchy or despotism in some form is all that is left." (1) As Lincoln explain, secession is rule by the minority. One small faction of a larger sovereign cannot individually decide to claim all sovereignty over itself. My proof exists on observance, for if such a claim were true, what would prevent mere households from becoming nations? What is secession? In essence, secession is a mere disempowerment of authority. If a right existed to remove something from the rule of an authority at will, then the authority has no authority! Entities would simply declare their independence whenever decisions were not to their liking. If South Carolina can declare independence from the U.S, then a county can declare its independence from South Carolina,...and then a city can declare its independence, and then individuals can declare independence. What then happens to authority? It has no power. There is no rule, no government, and what is left is the essence of anarchy, anyone can rule themselves at a moments notice. As an article published in the New York Times (1860) stated: "The ties that bind the States together will first be severed, and respect for law and order correspondingly weakened. Obligations to municipal laws will next be repudiated by a refusal on the part of the people to obey them. Next will follow the obligations between individuals, till neither persons nor property are longer respected, and forms of government become a mockery, because they can neither command respect nor enforce obedience." (2)To argue for a right to secession is to argue for a right to anarchy. Reliquished Sovereignty Imagine if 50 people had 50 individually owned pieces of wood and nailed it all together to form a building to house them all. Should one of the people be dissatisfied with the new living arrangements, can he simply rip out his plank, freezing the entire house, and be on his merry way? Of course not. The individual may leave, but he cannot take his plank because it no longer belongs to him. He relinquished INDIVIDUAL ownership of the plank for a joint ownership of the house. There was no settlement on the time that the plank would return to individual ownership, nor was there any talk that the plank must return. The default policy is that the arrangement is permanent until both the giving and recieving parties consensually agree on any changes. "By ratifying the Constitution, the people transferred certain limited sovereign powers to the federal government from their states" (3) "The United States of America consists of fifty states with limited autonomy" (4)Likewise, the state, through entry to the union and ratification of the Constitution relinquished INDIVIDUAL sovereignty over itself to form one united sovereign. Secession takes away the plank (sovereignty) from the house (The United States) when that sovereignty was not theirs for the taking. This is not to mean that the state has no sovereignty, it is just that the DEGREE of sovereignty that would permit it to secede was handed to the United States. There is no expiration date on the Constitution, and there is no mention of this Union even having to ever end. Therefore, the default policy is that the Union is perpetual until there is consensus on secession. Sources1. http://www.bartleby.com...2. http://www.nytimes.com...3. http://en.wikipedia.org...4. http://www.wordiq.com...