(once more, with gusto) The observation was not offered with the intention of "justifying" or excusing anything. I merely pointed it out to illustrate that those who lean so heavily on the criticism while ignoring the same "abuse" by the other side (or should I capitalize abuse? LOL) do so without intellectual honesty.
You are confusing the absolutist position of "no abridgement of free speech" with my position of "be consistent with your founding principles."
If the Confederates had no protection for "Free Speech", then they weren't being inconsistent with their own principles. The Union, however did have such protection, and therefore were inconsistent with their own governing rules.
Now though I consider "Freedom of Speech" to be a very important right, I am still applying the principle expressed here:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
I think the Confederates should have had protections for Free speech, but I don't know if they did or of if they didn't. If they didn't, that would appear to have been their choice. Neither Canada nor Britain tolerates what we call "Free Speech", so such a thing is not without precedent.
What you want, is that *if* we take umbrage at the Union's abuse of "Free Speech, etc." then we should also take umbrage at the Confederates abusing "Free Speech, etc." My position is that the issue is one of contradiction with stated principles of governance. If you can show me where whatever passes for the Confederate governing Charter forbids the activity they engaged in, you will have demonstrated them to be equally bad as the Union in the context of not following their own governing principles.
But if you want to make an issue out of their denial of "Free Speech and other rights", My God man! They were supporting slavery! Don't you think the denial of "Free Speech and other rights" is a bit trivial in the context here?