You mean an honest man? Yeah, I get that a lot.
Again, it is self evident to me that if the Declaration was intended to apply to Slaves, they would have emancipated them all en masse. To suggest otherwise is simply dishonest adherence to what we wish to believe.
Now I think the Declaration laid the foundation for what became eventual emancipation, but when it was written that was certainly not it's intent.
Of course that was not its intent. It expressed a universally applicable principle that for prudential reasons could not be put into effect immediately. Most of the delegates made that very clear in, for instance, the Constitutional Convention.
BTW, the Dred Scott decision was loaded with errors of fact and law.
For example, it says blacks were nowhere citizens of the colonies or new states. In fact, there were at least five states, including NC!, where free blacks were legally full citizens entitled to vote. But Taney just ignored this fact because it didn’t fit his argument.
The decision was disaster on every level. Much like Roe, it was intended to use the power of the Court to impose a final solution of a political controversy. At which it comprehensively failed.