The Constitution is not the dominant authority. It cannot be regarded as a more powerful authority in American Law than the previous British Law was regarded by the Colonies.
In British Law there was no question in anyone's mind that every subject owed the King perpetual allegiance. It was an absolutely unquestioned position, and yet they regarded the Principle of the Declaration of Independence to be sufficiently strong to morally override the British Law that had ruled them all their lives.
If the Declaration can override absolute British Law, which is clear and firm on the issue of Independence, it can certainly override a weak and tenuous claim to "Perpetual Allegiance" as some assert is in the Constitution.
It was the Declaration of Independence which gave the Constitution whatever power it possesses, not the other way around.
Now I very much doubt you can grasp the point I have put forth. You have impressed me as being nothing more than a typical emotional Knee Jerker without any interest in understanding concepts such as "Natural Law", and "Rights", and I figure that I have just wasted my time typing the explanation above.
Maybe i'll get surprised.
When you start speaking of Natural Law and Rights, then the South was absolutely wrong to secede. We broke from England because of the tyranny of taxation without representation, a moral cause. The south attempted their secession to perpetuate slavery, as their Declarations of Secession admitted, an immoral cause.