I don't see how you can make that argument unless you also want to argue that those states that didn't ratify the 13th Amendment can still have slavery or those states that didn't ratify the 2nd Amendment can totally ban gun ownership.
I can make that argument about Senate representation because Article V explicitly addresses it. It does not address slavery or gun ownership. It says “no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate”. I’m suggesting “equal suffrage in” means voting representation in, “consent” means ratification, and “state” means state legislature. Is this such a stretch?