My belief (worth exactly what you paid for it) is that the United States was “founded” as a treaty between equal and sovereign nation-states and the Constitution is that treaty. I believe (there goes that word again) that the states agreed to support that treaty (and NOT to be subject to a government greater than themselves—who would DO that?)...and I believe that the original intent was for the federal government to provide and maintain a unified armed forces and provide a uniform judicial system to arbitrate disputes between the states...I DO NOT believe that forcing one of those states to remain in the union if they chose to leave was their original intent, nor do I believe that many of Lincoln’s actions (i.e., suspension of habeas corpus, arresting the elected officials in Maryland, consolidation of federal power) was anything the founders had envisioned or would have approved.
I think your referring to them as 'equal and sovereign nation-states' badly exaggerates their status. They were neither nations or sovereign, and never were intended to be. But I agree completely with you that they were all equal. And as equals then it stands to reason that some states cannot on their own declare that the compact is violated and leave at the expense of those staying. I believe the Constitution protected all states, those wanting to leave and those wanting to stay. And in light of that I can't understand how someone can say the Constitution could be used as a club by those states wanting to leave to beat those wanting to stay. It just doesn't make sense.
...nor do I believe that many of Lincoln’s actions (i.e., suspension of habeas corpus, arresting the elected officials in Maryland, consolidation of federal power) was anything the founders had envisioned or would have approved.
Again you badly overstate the case. Lincoln's action in suspending habeas corpus may or may not have violated the Constitution. Since the Supreme Court has never ruled on the question then we can't say for sure. As for the Maryland legislature, treason is treason. The South was engaged in a bloody and violent rebellion against the U.S., a rebellion they themselves started. Some members of the Maryland legislature were advocating joining that rebellion. How can anyone not look upon that as treason? And your vague claim of 'consolidation of federal power' is hard to debate without any specifics.
Check your FReepmail to see squirter get his/her a$$ handed to him/her on a silver platter.