The fact that your position leads you to some awkward places does not mean that they aren't valid extensions of your position. And you can't claim an absolute right to secede for any reason, at any time, and then say that you can't secede if your cause violates some rights of some class that are currently protected. Because once you invoke the magic words, you're now a different country and the rights of citizens in your previous country are meaningless.
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the led-hander is not equal to the right-handed man"
This is where we differ monsieur, I see no awkwardness in any of my positions. If you arrive in an awkward place then you aren't extending my position correctly.
And you can't claim an absolute right to secede for any reason, at any time, and then say that you can't secede if your cause violates some rights of some class that are currently protected.
And this is an example of what I mean. Yes, you can. The natural law principles involved are not a buffet. They go together as a set.
"Our new Government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the led-hander is not equal to the right-handed man"
And if this is also the position of the Union, then as far as both sides are concerned, this claim is valid for both parties.
They are both wrong, and to the same degree.
Oh, and rockrr, are you getting this? More examples of what I keep telling you about other people bringing it up.