[x]

If slavery delegitimizes the Southern state's right to independence, then it must also delegitimize the original Colonies right to independence.

Not necessarily. Slavery was a centerpiece -- the cornerstone -- of the CSA, but not of the American revolutionaries of 1776.

Everyone knew the attitude of the CSA government towards slavery. Things were more ambiguous in the 1770s.

African-Americans were fighting in the patriot Army. Pennsylvania committed itself to the abolition of slavery in 1780, Massachusetts in 1783 (based on the 1780 state constitution).

It wasn't clear to everyone in the Revolutionary era that independence would mean the continuation of slavery. It was in the Confederate states in the 1860s.

[HandyDandy]

No person who can make a statement like this:

DL: They too were a slave owning Confederacy seceding from a Union and led by a slave owning General from Virginia.

Could be able to understand one word of your post. None of what fellow Americans hold to be self-evident is evident to him. His is caught in a prison of his own device.

[jeffersondem]

“Not necessarily. Slavery was a centerpiece — the cornerstone — of the CSA, but not of the American revolutionaries of 1776”

You make it sound like the South was fighting for slavery.

[DiogenesLamp]

Not necessarily. Slavery was a centerpiece -- the cornerstone -- of the CSA, but not of the American revolutionaries of 1776.

That is not a rebuttal to the principle that a people have a right to independence. Perhaps it wasn't a centerpiece of 1776 because nobody was making a major butt-hurt issue about it at the time.

Of course the British were offering Freedom to any slave that would join them in the fight against the Colonists. Does this make the British side the more moral of the two?

Things were more ambiguous in the 1770s.

Less ambiguous. Slavery was accepted in all the colonies at that time. Everyone knew exactly where the nation stood on this issue, and there was no confusion about the legality of slavery. It wasn't a centerpiece of the conflict precisely because it was not a bone of contention amidst any of the involved parties.

African-Americans were fighting in the patriot Army.

And the British Army. The ones in the British army were already free, but many in the American army went back to being slaves after the war ended. Oh yes, some brave and courageous men were manumitted, but not all.

Pennsylvania committed itself to the abolition of slavery in 1780

But didn't actually do it until 1840. There were still 64 slaves listed in Pennsylvania until then.

Massachusetts in 1783 (based on the 1780 state constitution).

Based on Liberal misinterpretation of the newly adopted State Constitution, you know, the way Liberal activist Judges always deliberately misinterpret laws they don't like. Having judges impose it on the rest of the state hardly constitutes a conscious decision on the part of the people.

It wasn't clear to everyone in the Revolutionary era that independence would mean the continuation of slavery.

It was very clear. In fact it was so clear, the Founders enacted a clause in the constitution that directly deals with it.

Article IV, Section II.
No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

I am presenting you with the UGLY parts of History. You may not like them, but they are accurate.