BF,The Constitution and the Bill of Rights don't mention slavery
[list]I have the right to vote and so to all my black friends.
the left is fearful of someone on the court who believes in limited government. if Kavanaugh is confirmed and becomes the reliable fifth vote to uphold the original intent of the Constitution. In that case, Dems would be out in the cold and America would be witnessing the advent of a new legal era, though it will take years to be fully realized because of the Supremes’ deference to earlier rulings
Now we’re getting somewhere!
Historical fact has been provided that PROVES the intent of the fore-fathers was to create a government where only rich white men could vote. By definition anyone believing this Intent was a good thing either doesn’t understand our history or is a misogynist, a racist and/or an oligarchist. But, you can be assured the Kochs and 1%ers, Scalia, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh do understand this Intent.
Your bold assertions about having a right to vote and slavery not in the Constitution PROVES that Koch Propaganda possesses your soul and spirit. Another trait of the Koch believer [Some don’t even realize this is what they are] is they meet scholarship with insults and spin. They’ll NEVER engage in scholarship and critical thinking.
First, how can a woman sing the praises of the fore-fathers? They made sure it was ILLEGAL for women to vote for 150 years. They were misogynist pig jagholes. I mean WTF could a woman be thinking in this regard?
Did you know that after the US Constitution’s ratification only New Jersey’s Constitution did not prohibit women the vote? And for the obvious social reasons women did not vote in great numbers until the very late 1790s. As the century turned, suddenly feeling the power of their voice, the women’s vote began to actually change the course to which the rich white man was heading. So, in 1807 New Jersey’s Constitution was changed, it criminalizes anyone other than white male property holders that voted.
The oligarchs didn’t just wake-up one day and decide women can vote; Patriotic, fearless women [and some men] risked life, limb and incarceration to decriminalize women voting. If all women continued to sit back and praise the forefathers, they still wouldn’t be able to vote.
On voting in general; the Constitution nor the Bill provide for voting rights because our Nation was conceived in oligarchy and the prospect that White rich Men are equal. We’ve had 60 Presidential administrations and 120 different Congresses and no Constitutional provisions that the Vote is a right. Who would object? It’s a universally agreed thing by the far right, the far left and everyone in between. You gotta wake-up! One man-one vote horrifies the Robberbaron, they realize 325M unified Americans could impose their will on them either thru the vote or job actions. This is the reason they love to see idiots calling themselves “right” or “left” throwing hate at one other…THEY LOVE IT!
The closest we came to Voting being a right was Reynolds  and the series of Voter Rights Acts of the 1960s. These are being eroded by recent SCOTUS decisions [Valeo(1976); Citizen’s United (2010) and Husted (2018)]. FACT: You have no right to vote, never had one and Kavanaugh will work to further erode Reynolds and the VRAs of the 60's!
How dare you say slavery is not mentioned in the Constitution? What ignorant moron or deceptive clown are you relying on for this silliness? Art. 1 §2 states “other persons” are to be counted as 3/5 of “free persons.” “Other persons” than free persons are SLAVES!!!!! Art. 4 § 3states, “No Person held to Service or Labour in one State;” you understand this is describing slaves, right? Even this aside; slavery existed in EVERY state and surrounding territory that one could anticipate being part of the US, it was exhaustively discussed during the Convention, and the document on which our Nation is founded, didn’t mention ENDING slavery. That means the document ENDORSED slavery. Slavery occurred in EVERY state but [Vermont] up to 1860.
FACT: every single fore-father supported slavery with their actions, nonactions or lack of protest to it; even if some duplicitous lying assholes called themselves abolitionists. It wasn’t until 100 Years later, after all of our Founding Fathers, their kids and most grandkids were DEAD, that bondage slavery was supplanted by another 100 years of economic and social slavery [Jim Crow]. It is unconverted that our fore-father's intent was racism. So, tell me who wants to decide our laws today by their intent? HUH? I see 3 choices for you: Challenge the scholarship; admit their Intent should not be emulated or announce that you still agreed with their Intent.
If you have to argue things like slavery is not mentioned in Constitution to support the idea that our fore-fathers were great men; then even you know your beliefs can’t be intellectually supported. So why are you holding on to them so with such venom?