>> People who READ and interpret the plain language of actual written LAWS, instead of basing their ideas and thoughts on their “feelings” about the way things SHOULD have been, are a menace to our Republic
This has nothing, whatsoever, to do with anyone’s “feelings”. This has to do with very the principles of our foundation.
The question is, do you believe that we are each endowed by the Creator with rights that are inalienable? If so, how can you believe legitimate or legal government actions which specifically foster the alienation of those right via the enslavement of millions?
The Constitution cannot legitimately rescind inalienable rights of innocent men — and, if it can, then those rights are not inalienable. Therein lies the contradiction.
Is our loyalty to the paper that the Constitution was written on, or to the principles it was constructed to protect?
SnakeDoc
As a lawyer, you SHOULD know that, LEGALLY, the "four corners of the agreement" is all that matters. That is why the "four corners" had to be changed via the 13th Amendment, and subsequently the 14th Amendment.
And I disagree - You ARE allowing your feelings to interfere with a strictly logical and rational interpretation of what is, basically, a legal contract between the United States government and its member States and citizens.
At the time the agreement was written and codified, slaves were not recognized as citizens (or even men, according to some). They were considered property. Thus, the legal agreement did not include rights for them.
You said: The question is, do you believe that we are each endowed by the Creator with rights that are inalienable?. The answer is: Yes, but that isn't REALLY the question.
What I personally think or believe or "feel" doesn't matter one whit. What matters is, as I have already said, what is WRITTEN in the agreement.
What law school taught you that our basic law (the Constitution) was based on the Bible?