When you change your mind of what clauses mean it does dismiss you and your understanding of what such clauses, yes. The only other understanding you can come to is that he learned more about the subject, but that would just mean he was wrong in 1869 and right in 1875, which would harm you greatly. Either way you are ****ed here.You dismiss what you don't like. This is noted.
I debunked their opinions based on the constitution itself and the founders thoughts on it. This what you do when you are arguing against court rulings.1. "I disagree with the Supreme Court. Therefore, secession is legal." That's not how it works. If you disagree with the Supreme Court, then you disagree on whether it should be legal. But the SC already declared it illegal, so I'm not sure what you think you're debunking.
I gave reasoning behind everything I said, as have everyone else. There is little point in going over it again. You just have to argue against it for a change instead of just repeating yourself without facing any counter arguments that might harm you.2. If I say the word "debunked", people will believe me. That's also not how it works.
Unless you can show how I am wrong, and how the founders can be wrong about what they wrote you have no case other than yourself.The word you're looking for is "disagree". You disagree with the Supreme Court rulings. You disagree with Chase and Lincoln. You disagree that most issues in the Civil War revolved around slavery. When you accept this, we might be able to have a conversation, but at this point, you've just become a parrot without substance.