Replies

On what actions or words of Lincoln's (in 1860 or before) do you base this extraordinary claim? What had he said or done that would have led southerners to believe this?

LOL, not so "extraordinary" if you perhaps read any of the quotes I'm referring to in our previous threads...everywhere from Lincoln's own words to his party's creation and platform, and all the happy abolitionist dialog leading to his election.

Here are a couple pre-1860 re-hashes...feel free to go back and read the rest:

1857 response to Scott ruling:
I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation. I have no right to say all the members of the Republican party are in favor of this, nor to say that as a party they are in favor of it. There is nothing in their platform directly on the subject. But I can say a very large proportion of its members are for it, and that the chief plank in their platform—opposition to the spread of slavery—is most favorable to that separation.

So the Republican party platform that elected him may have "led southerners to believe this". But here's Lincoln again a year later in 1858:
I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.

My way or the highway (or horse-and-buggy-way, or whatever it was back then) - quite diplomatic.

Etc., etc. - the greatest hits have been played out here enough to keep repeating. If you still think it's extraordinary after you do some more homework, or read what we've already sent you, see my last post about being "obtuse".

(Lincoln0: “I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.”

Palestinian Authority: “My way or the highway (or horse-and-buggy-way, or whatever it was back then) - quite diplomatic.”

You have a disturbing habit of imputing values, often without warrant, to people with whom you disagree. There are discussion sites on the ‘net wherein this tactic is employed, but typically not so much at conservative sites.

Yes, quite diplomatic, and no, not “My way or the highway” in any sense. He stated a truism that is indisputable but he did not impose a unilateral solution - like the southron fire-eaters chose to unilaterally impose just a few short years later. It would appear that “My way or the highway” is the southron way.

Okay, we seem to be having trouble communicating.

Your claim was that “states” were treated differently.

The Republican party platform said nothing about treating states differently, but rather about whether slavery would be allowed to expand into the territories, where the federal government, not the states, had authority.

Slavery had previously been outlawed, with minimal complaint, in some of the territories for decades until repealed at southern assistance. Yet the reinstitution (and possibly expansion) of this previous policy in your mind was somehow an example of treating states differently that justified secession and war?

Lincoln’s remarks about a house divided being unable to stand is actually a quote from the Bible. As he said at the time, if you wanted to argue the principle, you needed to take it up with a higher authority than him.