But the Declaration teaches us that only "just laws" can be derived from the consent of the governed.
Wow! You really bastardized that thought.
The declaration says the govt only gets "just power" if the governed consent.
Here is the exact language: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."
The Declaration appeals to a higher law---both "the laws of nature and of nature's God"---which are in agreement as to what constitutes morality. Notice that the Declaration does not say "deriving their powers from the consent of the governed". Rather it limits the power of government that can be so derived to "just powers" only. If only the "just powers" of government can be derived from the consent of the governed, it follows that consent cannot justify the government in doing anything unjust, which is to say anything intrinsically wrong or immoral. This is why both Jefferson and Lincoln taught that while the will of the majority is to govern, the will of the majority that is permitted to govern is only the "rightful" will of the majority. For example, the majority are not permitted to enact policies that deny the minority their equal rights.... This is also why the Preamble to the Consitution declares that the Constitution's purpose is to secure "the blessings of liberty...for ourselves and our posterity". A "blessing" is that which God wants you to have. It is something He thinks is good for you. The "liberty" which the Constitution seeks to preserve for ourselves and our posterity is therefore not "license". It is a liberty that is consistent with revealed religion (Judeo-Christian monotheism) and the laws of nature. Indeed, in the Declaration, the "laws of nature and of nature's God" are in agreement.
