Actually, yes, but the Constitution was amended to remedy those race issues -- Read 13th and 14th Amendments.
The Constitution should be open to new, more progressive interpretations, rather than sticking with one neanderthal view, IMHO.
Well, either words mean things or they don't.
If the Constitution is to be regarded as whatever 5 of 9 justices feel that day, then NO ONES rights are assured.
On the other hand, if we interpret a document based upon a fair reading of its original meaning, then our rights aren't subject to the latest PC fads.
Hey, the Framers put in a process to change the Constitution. I'd rather the Constitution be changed by Constituinal convention than by the whims of Judicial fiat.
By the way, a "neanderthal view" is one where our individual rights are subject to the whims of judges, rather than the rule of law.