The whole basis for race-based slavery was that the enslaved weren't "men" in the same way that the enslavers were - an attitude that has deep, deep historical roots (going as far back as the ancient Greeks, including those of Athens). Since, by the hypothesis of the day, the enslaved weren't "men," then it would necessarily follow from that hypothesis that those rights did not apply to the enslaved, no matter how self-evidently they applied to the enslavers. It was, and is, that secondary hypothesis concerning the status of the once-enslaved as "men" that was in error, not the self-evidentness of the rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.
Correct, and well-said.
The principals of our founding documents and the constitution are designed to prevent enslavement of one class of men over another. The flaw wasn't the document, it was the definition of "men". That has since been corrected. Those principals are largely being ignored by government these days, unfortunately. Witness the selective taxation of some individuals for the benefit of others - de facto enslavement in essence. The present use of government power to steal from the productive is in direct opposition to the tenets of the constitution of this country.
