>>>You would have been a target of Union forces because of your screaming & yelling to break up America, one slave the other free.<<<
For the record, Lincoln originally had no problems with slavery. And it was not the intent of the Emancipation Proclamation to emancipate slaves in the Union states, only those in rebellion. Four Union states (Maryland, Deleware, Kentucky, and Missouri) continued holding slaves after the 'Emancipation'. Another slave state, West Virginia, was admitted to the Union after the war began. Certain slave-holding counties of Texas and Louisiana that were not in rebellion were permitted to continue to hold slaves. The Emancipation Proclamation did not free a single slave, and the notion that, without the war, there would have been two nations -- one free and the other slave -- is a myth. We would have had two nations alright, but one 'slave', and another with some slave states and some free states.
Wrong. Lincoln always felt slavery to be morally wrong. What he had problems with was the constitutionality of ending it where it already existed. There are plenty of Lincoln quotes to support this. Here's one from the first Lincoln-Douglas debate in 1858:
"This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the worldenables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocritescauses the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil libertycriticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest.
You also make the standard Lost Causer statement about the EP not doing this or not doing that, ignoring the fact that Lincoln also advocated passage of the 13th amendment, which DID end slavery in those areas not in rebellion, and doing it through the proper legal mechanism.
Legally he could not free slaves in those states not in rebellion.