Let us parse out this statement:
1. “We know the North had no concern for the slaves......” a) Who is “we”? b) Define “the North”. c)Please clarify, “no concern for the slaves.”
2. “........because the Northern Congress...”. Say what? It was a Joint Resolution passed by both houses of Congress.
3. “.......and with Lincoln’s urging,....” Surely you meant to say Buchanan.
4. “......passed the Corwin Amendment.” Of course no such thing ever happened. An Amendment requires ratification by the States. And certain States had already seceded by the time President Lincoln mentioned the Corwin Amendment in his First Inaugural Address.
5. “....which would make the Union into a nation that passed a constitutional amendment to preserve slavery.” When you say “Union”, do you mean the entire nation? Or, do you intend to imply the “North” would end up being a separate “nation” that passed a constitutional amendment to “preserve slavery”? Of course, you and I both know that the “proposed amendment” did not have as its “intent” to preserve slavery for the whole United States. The proposed amendment put the issue of slavery up to each individual State. You know, like States Rights and such. I do recall the time when you made the comment on a CW thread that President Lincoln had declared that he “had no objection to Slavery being made express and irrevocable. Remember that? Good times.
Powers that be in the North. You know, the Robber Barons, the Corrupt Politicians, the Tax and Spend Liberals, and most of the general public.
2. “........because the Northern Congress...”. Say what? It was a Joint Resolution passed by both houses of Congress.
The seven Southern states that made up the original Confederacy had already seceded and withdrew their representatives. What was left was mostly Northern States, with Corwin assuring Ohio, and Seward assuring New York would pass the amendment.
When I say "Northern Congress", I mean what was left of Congress after the original seven confederate states had withdrawn. It was a North heavy Congress that passed that amendment.
3. “.......and with Lincoln’s urging,....” Surely you meant to say Buchanan.
Seward was Lincoln's front man on passage in the Senate. I've read articles that indicate Lincoln D@mn near wrote the amendment himself, and then used proxies to shift the "credit" onto other people. In any case, Lincoln did urge it's passage in his first inaugural address, and he took the additional step of writing letters to all the governors informing them of it's passage through the Congress.
4. “......passed the Corwin Amendment.” Of course no such thing ever happened.
It most certainly did pass the Congress, with mostly Northern State votes. The word "passed" is still correct in that context, and that is clearly the intended context because we all know it did not "pass" all the states.
Of course, you and I both know that the “proposed amendment” did not have as its “intent” to preserve slavery for the whole United States.
What does "intent" have to do with the consequences of what would actually happen if that amendment passed? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. "Intent" means nothing. Consequences mean everything, and the consequence of what they had done would have been to extend legal slavery far into the future.
Yes, their "intent" was to keep the Southern states in the Union, but their means of attempting it was to create a condition of perpetual legal slavery.
The point here is that they cared more about keeping control of the Southern states than they did about the slaves.
So, we get to the end of your spiel, and not one lie have you found in what I said. This validates my point that you are seeing something that wasn't there.
You couldn't even find a lie with all your parsing.