A lovely quote that says precisely nothing about the ability of a party to unilaterally withdraw from a legal contract (your words) willingly entered into. Sorry, ma'am, but you're still out of luck.
The only 'legal, political, and Constitutional process of ending slavery' was for the owners to release the slaves.
In other words, as long as the individual slave holders thought slavery was OK, then it was OK for them to hold deny other human beings their unalienable rights.... Which is a rather ugly position for you to attempt to defend, I'm sure you'll agree.
If you think upholding the Constitution isn't honorable, then the very concept of the word escapes you.
You're the one who is explicitly defending slavery, ma'am. I'd be rather amazed if you find that at all honorable.
Nice try. 'so enumeration weakens it, in cases not enumerated' precisely addresses your assertion that because secession was not enumerated, it wasn't in the contract.
The states, then, may wholly withdraw from the Union, but while they continue, they must retain the character of representative republics. Governments of dissimilar forms and principles cannot long maintain a binding coalition. "Greece," says Montesquieu, "was undone as soon as the king of Macedon obtained a seat in the amphyctionic council." It is probable, however, that the disproportionate force as well as the monarchical form of the new confederate had its share of influence in the event. But whether the historical fact supports the theory or not, the principle in respect to ourselves is unquestionable.
William Rawle
-----
In other words, as long as the individual slave holders thought slavery was OK, then it was OK for them to hold deny other human beings their unalienable rights
So said the Constitution, yes.
-----
Which is a rather ugly position for you to attempt to defend, I'm sure you'll agree.
As I have never attempted to defend the morality of slavery, my agreement is immaterial.
-----
You're the one who is explicitly defending slavery, ma'am. I'd be rather amazed if you find that at all honorable.
LOL! If you think posting pertinent writings and legal treatise to show where the federal government overstepped it's Constitutional bounds and subjugated the States is 'defending slavery', you're delusional.