Yes. It argues that God's law and Nature's law is higher than man's law, and according to Nature and God, people have a right to be independent if they wish to be.
The authority of the D of I is not mandatory, but it is presumed and persuasive authority in regards to the Constitution.
Well it is mandatory for a nation that points to it as their authority to leave a larger Union. They needed to invoke a higher power than man made law to justify their independence, else they would have been morally obliged to obey the law of the Union to which they belonged.
You cannot very well assert that You have a right to secede from a Union, but nobody else does. That is hypocrisy.
As I said, the things contained in the D of I are not constitutional dictates, but as the D of I says, what “Prudence, indeed, will dictate...”
More like Providence. Again, the source of their authority for the Declaration is God. Yes, the Declaration of Independence is not a mere constitutional dictate. It is the authority under which the US constitution obtains it's own legitimacy.
What I quote in that list, what you call “projecting”, are exact quotes in the D of I regarding justification for secession.
I am not disputing that those listed reasons are in there. I am disputing that they are a requirement to secede.
The text clearly states that the only requirement is a desire for independence.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
The Southern States had every right to leave for any reason they D@mned well pleased. The Union was voluntarily joined, and states should have been allowed to leave when their consent to being ruled from Washington D.C. was withdrawn.
Well then to you, there's no need to justify succession. Depending on how fast you hold to that view, the rest here may or may not matter to you.
I used to see it that way was well. But I agree with the authors of the D of I, the part you stop just short of...
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and causes; and accordingly all experience has shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
Like other associations, the freedom to join doesn't necessarily mean you can justifiably leave anytime you want. The D of I was written to explain what it takes to justly "change" or "dissolve political bands".