Replies

It really bothers me when armchair warriors ascribe malicious motives to people in another time you could not possibly have any knowledge of.

The desire to own other human beings as property—not to mention actually codifying slavery as a Right(!) in the founding documents which were establishing a new government—cannot be construed as anything other than a "malicious motive".

The fact that many middle class, non-slave-owning Southerners were manipulated into shedding their blood so that wealthy elites could buy, sell, rape, and kill other human beings—without incurring any legal liability—is a crying shame.

That is not to cast aspersions on your ancestor(s). They doubtless fought honorably and bravely—something to be proud of—but the cause for which they fought—and "right of property in negro slaves" which was codified into the Confederate Constitution—should certainly be sufficient to induce sober-minded reflection...

The desire to own other human beings as property—not to mention actually codifying slavery as a Right(!) in the founding documents which were establishing a new government—cannot be construed as anything other than a "malicious motive".
The fact that many middle class, non-slave-owning Southerners were manipulated into shedding their blood so that wealthy elites could buy, sell, rape, and kill other human beings—without incurring any legal liability—is a crying shame.
That is not to cast aspersions on your ancestor(s). They doubtless fought honorably and bravely—something to be proud of—but the cause for which they fought—and "right of property in negro slaves" which was codified into the Confederate Constitution—should certainly be sufficient to induce sober-minded reflection...

Finally some logic and sanity. I would only add that there was probably not even an ounce of manipulation in convincing Southerners to fight against Northern Invaders. Put it in reverse. If Rebel butternut soldiers had taken over Northern Cities and States what wild madness would that have instilled in people no matter the reason they were there?

As for codifying slavery in the Confederate Constitution, Our Constitution did not need to in 1787 because it was fully understood by all at the time and documented in the three fifths of a person apportionment in Article. I. Section. 2. What is the greater "malicious motive?"

It was already acknowledged as a right by the Union for "four score and seven years." The US Constitution explicitly protected slavery. Just look at Article IV, section II.