However, I don't believe you captured the proper meaning of "Perpetual Union". The founders believed the Union was granted by the favor of God (as clearly stated by Washington in his 1st inaugural), and the founders expressed the idea that Union would last as long as God willed it, not as long as they could "force" it, i.e. as long as an unconstitutionally over-reaching federal govt. can force it on all the States. They well understood that Union was predicated upon the blessings of Christian brotherly love, and "forced Union" is contrary to that Spirit.
Poohbah, I must note a disconnect here, however. You argued vehemently against my statement that the Decl. of Independence had the force of law (because there is no article or section number in teh US Code), yet now you argue that the Atticles of Confederation (a lesser document) also in the U.S. Code does have the force of law. Don't you see an inconsistency here? I could now demand that you show me the Section and Article number from the US Code or refuse to accept your assertion - but I won't. I know the A of C do carry some weight of law, and I won't mischaracterize their importance for sake of winning an argument, or out of pride.
No, I'm not, not in the present day. The Declaration of Independence has no force of law, either, because it is, at its heart, merely a statement of why the colonists opted to split from the mother country, and contains no legally enforceable content.
I'm arguing that the Constitution has the force of law. I'm also arguing that the Constitution did not just come from nowhere, with no context whatsoever (Ex nihilo, nihil fit), and that to understand the slightly vaguer portions of the Constitution, you have to look at the law that was in force at the time the Constitution was drafted--namely, the Articles of Confederation.