[smug]

"Does that mean you agree with the "living Constitution" advocates who say the Constitution's meaning changes over time?"

Absolutely not!

"there was no "intolerable oppression" occurring"

Apparently to the seceding states it was "intolerable" enough by vote.

The Civil War was a Revolution without cause -- unjustified since there was no "intolerable oppression" occurring. The Federal Government had every right to put it down. There were not being oppressed in any way. There was no right in the Constitution then, and there is no right today, to unilateral secession

from a different prospective---The America insurrection was a Revolution without cause -- unjustified since there was no "intolerable oppression" occurring. The British Government had every right to try and put it down. They were not being oppressed in any way. There was no right in British Law then, and there is no right today, to Independence.

[Ditto]

from a different prospective---The America insurrection was a Revolution without cause -- unjustified since there was no "intolerable oppression" occurring. The British Government had every right to try and put it down.

Allow me to introduce you to a document by the Founders that detailed, in specifics, the intollerable abuses they faced and why they were justified.

The Confederates never even attempted to claim abuse as the rational. Perhaps you can do it for them. I'd be interested to hear what abuses you think occurred.