AeroNalex saidI think you are wrong, but oh well. Also if you are referring to Abraham Lincoln and his Emancipation Proclamation, you'll be enlightened to know that he only emancipated slaves south of the Mason Dixon line. All slaves still held north of that line were not freed until much later. Freedmen in northern slave states were easily forced back into slavery in one form or another. There were also slaveholders in the south prior to the Proclamation who freed their slaves based on moral principle, such as my own family. Yet we still fought as proud confederates in the Civil War. Why? Because the War Between the States was not about slavery. It was more about Abraham Lincoln revoking the rights of those Confederate states while preserving the same right in the North. If we are not to be treated equally, then we will not be part of it. And don't even get me started on Thomas Jefferson.
The moral of the story is, the founding fathers made enormous errors of judgement in the past, I don't believe that their state of 'enlightenment' would allow them to see past the "facts" of the time. Gay was considered through and through to be a mortal sin, and so the constitution could have easily spelled out exactly how marriage works in this country.
Your information might be accurate and easily googled or, as you seem to have done, even studied, but beyond facts is the working of the mind and you have to a little careful when applying criticisms based upon what we know today and how we think today to what & how previous generations might have known and thought, particularly if you are then going to project how they might have later, beyond their era, incorporated this knowledge and applied these thoughts.
In the value of knowledge thread, another young man recently stipulated that cavemen thought practically identically to how we think today. While there may be some similarlies particularly in the example he cited, most certainly we've experienced some evolution of consciousness in the few years since, such that translating how they thought then to how we think now requires transposition (interpretting the intents of then, given the realizations of now) because not all values (ie not so much ethics but moreso the x's & y's) remain the same. Otherwise it would be like taking ice from cold to hot water and expecting to observe it appearing & behaving the same.
Enlightened is a relative term. Enlightened for that period. Even nirvana is nothing but a waypoint along the evolution of consciousness such that we can't even consider with our minds today what thinking might project beyond that point and yet we do have concepts of being enlightened today just as they had yesterday. Will the thinking beyond nirvana judge us as harshly as you enjoy judging your priors who did not have your privileges?
"There exists an obvious fact that seems utterly moral; namely, that a man is always a prey to his truths. Once he has admitted them, he cannot free himself from them