Talk:Republic of Texas (group)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 167.159.1.2 (talk) at 14:03, 26 July 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Removed the following text: Texas flies its flag at the same height as the US flag (unique among all the states). This is an urban legend. snopes

For the article: "Parallels can be drawn to the sedevacantist heresy of the Catholic Church." That POV? 68.39.174.39 01:26, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How is it POV? While the sentence seemed odd to me too, when I read the sedevacantist article I could see the parallels. Perhspa the sentence could be better written by explaining what those apralels are. -Willmcw 05:06, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
Calling the sedevacantists' viewpoint heresy is probably POV, since it's open for debate whether they are correct or not. Removing that word should eliminate the POV, I think. --Myles Long 14:31, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
That makes sense. I've re-worded it to drop the "heresy". Cheers, -Willmcw 19:28, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
Is it, though? Heresy is simply holding a viewpoint at odds with the orthodox or commonly accepted one--it does not mean that the view is necessarily wrong. Kurt Weber 16:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The US did not negotiate any May 3rd treaty with Texas, it does not recognize passports from the "Republic of Texas," and the "Austin Judgment" referred to was not written by any US federal court. It's not even a good forgery. I have removed all of these claims from the article. Gazpacho 01:57, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dose Texan indipendace realy have the support of all 12,000,000 or so Texans? Opal-kadett 20.36 UTC.

No way it is even near that amount. Texan here holmes, I don't support it and know of anyone who wants to seperate Texas from the USA.

Two Removed Sentences

I removed these two sentences as I could find nothing to verify them:

"Therefore, the vote has never been upheld and Texas has been considered a Captive Nation of War according to the World Court (1991). The US Supreme Court refused to hear the case as it did not have jurisdiction over Texas."

If someone can show a clear World Court ruling that Texas is legally a captive nation of war, please provide a citation via a link to the Internation Court of Justice site. As far as the US Supreme Court claiming it has no jurisdiction over Texas, this would appear to be in error. The Supreme Court hears and rules on cases from Texas often. Can some one show any SC ruling where the SC argues it has no jurisdiction over Texas? LarryQ 00:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reconstruction

  • The final battle of the American Civil War took place with the invasion of Galveston in 1869. Federal troops advanced into Austin, marched the Congress out on the lawn in front of a firing squad and threatened to shoot every member if they did not vote to restore statehood.

A battle has to be between two opposing forces. Did the federal troops meet armed opposition? Were bullets fired? This does not appear to be a battle, and eev if it were, it's not clear that it'd be a battle of the war or of Reconstruction. -Will Beback 00:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, this appears to be in error. The Civil War ended in 1865. I changed War between the States to American Civil War but did not catch this. This was definetly reconstruction... LarryQ 00:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Republic_of_Texas_(group)&oldid=65960758"