It takes a peculiar sort of feller to so completely turn rhyme and reason on its head - but you are certainly are peculiar.
Only someone like you could purport that turning ones back on the constitution and breaking the pact that drew this nation together could ever possibly be a constitutional act. Or that a person who fought to defend the constitution from sedition and insurrection could ever possibly be considered attempting to “overthrow the U.S. constitution”.
Or that a constitution “enshrines” a peculiarity that it doesn’t even identify be name. Ridiculous? Of course. Perverse? You bet. Par for the course? Unfortunately yea.
Is it your testimony here that the U.S. constitution does NOT include references to slavery, or is that just the impression you would like to leave with the unsuspecting?