Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Berlin_Freeper

It wouldn’t do any good to say that there were slave states in the Union, or that the war was about preserving the Union, not slavery.


15 posted on 02/21/2019 8:24:59 PM PST by Moonman62 (Facts are racist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Moonman62

I always felt that states rights was the camels back and slavery and the right of a state to leave the Union was the straw that broke it. Lincoln intended to preserve the Union. Doing so had to abolish slavery as part of that effort. IMO


18 posted on 02/21/2019 8:38:48 PM PST by Equine1952 (Get yourself a ticket on a common mans train of thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Moonman62
It wouldn’t do any good to say that there were slave states in the Union, or that the war was about preserving the Union, not slavery.

I think that's more right than wrong, but those two do not separate neatly.

From Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address:

One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war.

38 posted on 02/21/2019 11:05:37 PM PST by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Moonman62
It wouldn’t do any good to say that there were slave states in the Union, or that the war was about preserving the Union, not slavery.

Why inject historical facts and reality into the conversation? What's wrong with you?

55 posted on 02/22/2019 8:18:53 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson