[BroJoeK]

jeffersondem: "That is a fair argument Brother Joe. But an opposing argument was made just recently in Post 33 by someone your equal."

Sure, I totally "get" that you enjoy playing these word-definition games so much that the real truth of the matter is of no concern to you.

But the fact is that everyone here has been clear & consistent on the following points:

1. Deep South Fire Eaters first declared secession to protect slavery against the newly elected "Ape" Lincoln and his "Black Republicans".

2. War started at Fort Sumter, not over slavery, but over Jefferson Davis' concerns for Confederate "integrity" and Lincoln's intention to regain lost Federal properties.

3. Slavery quickly became an issue in 1861 when fugitives began escaping to Union lines, were declared emancipated "contraband", hired to support the Union cause and so not returned.

4. By war's end, freeing the slaves was a major rallying cry for Union troops (i.e., Howe's song) and a Federal political goal, accomplished with ratification of the 13th amendment.

So, enjoy twisting & spinning all that as much as you wish, but the facts don't change.

[DiogenesLamp]

Slavery quickly became an issue in 1861 when fugitives began escaping to Union lines, were declared emancipated "contraband", hired to support the Union cause and so not returned.

They didn't do that initially, but they started doing that after a month or so. But while we are on the subject, what was their legal basis for doing that?

The way I read the relevant part of the US Constitution at the time, what they did was against the law. Or should I say, it was against the law if the US Constitution still applied to the South, which the North claims it did, though they did not act in this case as if they believed it did.

They did in fact behave in this case as if the South truly was an independent country to which the US Constitution no longer applied.

Because if they believed the South to still be part of the US nation, they could not lawfully free those slaves.

Of course it's pretty clear that no law or principle held sway, and people just did pretty much whatever they wanted to do.

[jeffersondem]

“Sure, I totally “get” that you enjoy playing these word-definition games so much that the real truth of the matter is of no concern to you.”

Yes, I have asked about some contradictory statements you have made. And about some wrongheaded claims. That is not word-definition games. Just holding you accountable.

Maybe it is unfair.