We were addressing Calhoun's powerful 1848 speech that called for legislative action underpinned by the Constitution and the concept of liberty instead of the misinterpreted notions of egalitarianism.
Remember Calhoun's words: ....(The issue) Has the northern States the power which they claim, to exclude the southern from emigrating freely, with their property, into Territories belonging to the United States, and to monopolize them for their exclusive benefit?....
If he (historians studying the failure of the Constitution) should possess a philosophical turn of mind, and be disposed to look at more remote and recondite causes, he will trace it to a proposition which originated in a hypothetical truism, but which, as now expressed and now understood, is the most false and dangerous of all political error.
The proposition to which I allude has become an axiom in the minds of a vast majority on both sides of the Atlantic, and is repeated daily, from tongue to tongue, as an established and incontrovertible truth; it is, that “all men are born free and equal.” I am not afraid to attack error, however deeply it may be intrenched, or however widely extended, whenever it becomes my duty to do so, as I believe it to be on this subject and occasion.
Who did you kill to become the judge of what's relevant and what's not?
You are one of those annoying people who keep posting quotes that they can't or won't discuss or analyze or defend.
If someone claims to defend liberty by attacking the idea that all people have liberties from birth or nature and advocates the idea that some people have liberties and others don't, that person is no true friend of liberty.
Or do you really think that denying some whole class of people basic civil and human rights somehow furthers the cause of freedom? Because that's what's at stake here.
Could you deal with that point? Try to engage it in some way -- agree, disagree, analyze -- or stop making asinine posts to me.