If memory serves there were some who thought the entire bill or rights was a compromise, an unnessary addition because its inclusion suggested that anything needed to be spelled out at all and that anything clarifying our "natural rights" had the potential to limit them. I'll have to dive back into some history books. There were several compromises in regard to slavery. Early founding documents being more anti, later drafts modified to bring in more support from the South.

The concept of compromise, particularly in politics, does not equal "constant compromise" ... that's just a slow surrender.