ROFL!
Nice try, but the Articles ceased to exist in 1789. There's also something called the Rule of Exclusion that's been in operation for a very long time.
• § 207. XIII. Another rule of interpretation deserves consideration in regard to the constitution. There are certain maxims, which have found their way, not only into judicial discussions, but into the business of common life, as founded in common sense, and common convenience. Thus, it is often said, that in an instrument a specification of particulars is an exclusion of generals; or the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Lord Bacon's remark, "that, as exception strengthens the force of a law in cases not excepted, so enumeration weakens it in cases not enumerated," has been perpetually referred to, as a fine illustration.
Justice Joseph Story on Rules of Constitutional Interpretation
Without the Constitution specifically stating the Union is permanent, indissoluble, perpetual or some other descriptive, it cannot BE so. It's part of what makes it a document for limited government.
Well MamaT you can rolf all you want but I got that from reading legal opinions on the subject. Jeeze when I started this hip hooray to a pro 2nd amendment individual rights article I hoped against hope that it wouldnt break down into a federalism v states rights argument. This is deja vue all over again for me because I've posted pro-gun articles before and it always seems to happen. But I'll bite. As I said up the thread, I am no legal scholar but when a union goes from perpetual union to a more perfect union, more perfect union doesn't negate perpetual union. One can have both. Or more importantly one can perfect a perpetual union but a perfect union doesn't need to be perpetuated. The framers indended tp perfect a perpetual union. Sorry for the alliteration.
I need to add a “more perfect union” than what? Answer: The perpetual union they had originally devised.
This is exactly what Hamilton and Madison were talking about when they warned that a Bill of Rights would be used against the People to deny and "disparage" other rights not enumerated.
That's why Madison, when he finally consented to write the Bill of Rights, in order to ensure that it be "done right", penned the Ninth Amendment, which explicitly voids Justice Story's assertion, and Lord Bacon's, that claims of, or appeals to, non-enumerated principles or rights are weak.