[DiogenesLamp]

So you believe that it is perfectly ethical to own a person as one would own a dog, horse, or sheep. You see no injustice, evil, or moral issues with the enslavement of 4.2 million people.

Of course that was morally wrong, but it was absolutely legally correct, and nobody invaded them because they owned people.

Stop trying to make the war about "owning people" because that had nothing to do with why Union soldiers marched across the border to kill people in the Southern states.

Trying to pull this bait and switch with slavery as some sort of explanation for why Union armies marched, is just dishonest.

You *KNOW* that Union armies didn't march because of slavery. You *KNOW* that slavery would have continued in the North and the South if the war hadn't occurred, so stop trying to argue from a moral point that was not relevant to why a war was began.

[Bull Snipe]

Stop trying to make the war about “owning people” because that had nothing to do with why Union soldiers marched across the border to kill people in the Southern states.

Trying to pull this bait and switch with slavery as some sort of explanation for why Union armies marched, is just dishonest.

You *KNOW* that Union armies didn’t march because of slavery. You *KNOW* that slavery would have continued in the North and the South if the war hadn’t occurred, so stop trying to argue from a moral point that was not relevant to why a war was began.

All true up until Jan 1863. From that date on everywhere Union troops marched slaves existed no more.