Nonsense, since you found the words "should not" and reframed them to mean "should", otherwise there is not a single word in the Declaration to support your wacked-out "unlimited right of secession" nonsense.
The entire Declaration, from beginning to end, is built around the words "necessary" and "necessity", driven by "a long train of abuses and usurpations" and it's simply yet another Big Lie for you to claim otherwise.
DiogenesLamp: "You also keep failing to understand, probably deliberately so, that what *YOU* consider tolerable, someone *ELSE* may consider completely intolerable, and *YOU* do not have a right to impose *YOUR* ideas on other people of what *THEY* should tolerate."
Well... first, neither of the words "tolerable" or "intolerable" appear in the Declaration, so your argument here is totally bogus, for that reason alone.
Second, the Declaration has nothing to do with how much you personally can tolerate or suffer, and everything to do with the facts about a "long train of abuses and usurpations" showing "a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism".
Do such conditions exist or not?
That's what mattered to our Founders.
DiogenesLamp: "Abuses and grievances are in the eye of the beholder, not yours."
Nonsense, just as in any fair trial, abuses & grievances are matters of fact & law -- they either exist or they don't.
Our Founders laid out in great detail what they considered legally actionable "abuses and usurpations" and I see no reason -- none, zero, nada reason -- to dispute their judgments on it.