If you think it is unreasonable that the Union should have to abide by the system of law that it violently forced on people who did not want it, then I don't really see what point there is in arguing with you.
Preserving the Constitution is tantamount to preserving the Union, because the Union only exists as a condition of the agreement known as the Constitution.
If the constitution isn't supreme, it's not a constitutional Union, it is an usurpation.
You’re welcome to get the hell out - any time.
First go back and re-read my post #559 on the constitutional "suicide pact", it applies here.
Second, the US Constitution was not "forced" on anybody.
Rather its protections & rights were temporarily denied to those who declared & waged war on the United States.
Those rights were then restored after loyalty was reconfirmed through either pledges or pardons.
DiogenesLamp: "Preserving the Constitution is tantamount to preserving the Union, because the Union only exists as a condition of the agreement known as the Constitution."
But the Constitution was never intended as a suicide pact which must self destruct whenever clever legal minds like DiogenesLamp can poke enough holes in it.
The fact is that by 1876 former Confederates were back in power in the South and so effectively nullified the 13th, 14th & 15th for nearly 100 years.
And how is that even a little "constitutional"?