Our FRiend DiogenesLamp says he's not a reb, has never lived in the South, and we must take him at his word on such things.
But he is actually not here to defend the Confederacy per se, rather, just one minor (or major!) philosophical point relating to it: his alleged unlimited "right to secede" -- any time, any where, for any reasons or for no reason at all, secession "at pleasure"!
DiogenesLamp claims this is just what the 1776 Declaration of Independence establishes, and therefore no implied obligations of the 1787 Constitution can override it.
But DiogenesLamp is wrong on every philosophical point here, beginning with the Declaration's alleged unlimited "right of secession".
In fact, the 1776 Declaration of Independence lays out in detail specific conditions which motivated our Founders.
Since no such conditions existed in 1860, the Declaration is not correctly applied to justify Fire-Eater secessions.
Foolishly, embarrassingly wrong.
a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Not a requirement.