This brushes over the importance of the difficulties that were involved in these infidelities. Sometimes resistance to action is as important as the freedom to act. When decrees are unhindered, the scope of mistakes can grow large. Consider that for each of these infidelities, what would have the course of action been if there wasn't the Constitutional argument of resistance? I doubt that they would be more measured.The deep-seated fear that such disobedience would unravel our social fabric is mere superstition. As we have seen, the country has successfully survived numerous examples of constitutional infidelity.
This is an important point. From this point of view, the Constitution is a thickening agent, barring us from affecting too much change at any time. This touches on a larger philosophical issue which I have studied briefly - that massive economic/societal change of any kind is generally bad for a country.
The strength of the American government is that its change is slow. This gives people time to ponder out the change, to bring up any flaws with what might occur, and prevents a government which may have gained power for a small period of time from just breaking everything quickly. It all has to be done through a process.