[Vendome]

I’d have to research to refute many of the points made in this article but, unfortunately, the southern states did declare slavery as one of reasons for and primary to their sovereignty for secession.

See North Carolina.

[DiogenesLamp]

I’d have to research to refute many of the points made in this article but, unfortunately, the southern states did declare slavery as one of reasons for and primary to their sovereignty for secession.

But the great lie is that the Union was fighting to end slavery, when in fact it was not. Ignoring the Southern reasons for wanting independence, what were the legitimate Union reasons for stopping it?

All the original 13 colonies were slave states too. The British offered freedom to any slave who would join them in the fight to stop US Independence. For some reason, none of the Colonies get considered to be "the bad guys."

[ought-six]

In all, thirteen states had Articles of Secession (though only eleven ever actually ratified them, and they became the eleven states of the Confederate States of America). In those eleven Articles of Secession, only four specifically mentioned slavery as a cause (note: just one of many causes): South Carolina; Mississippi; Texas; and Georgia. Virginia’s only mention of it was to effect it expressed solidarity with the slave states that had seceded. The day after Virginia ratified its Articles of Secession (May 23, 1861), Union troops marched into Northern Virginia (May 24, 1861).

So, of thirteen Articles of Secession; only four expressly mentioned slavery as a reason. But they ALL cited self-determination as a reason.

I find it amusing that so many Lincoln apologists cite Clause 5, Article III, Sec. 3 of the U.S. Constitution to support their conclusion that the seceded states committed treason simply by seceding. However, a close reading of that authority does not support such a conclusion. It states, rather, that treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them.

Also, if we accept Lincoln’s and his apologists’ argument that the seceded states were not, in fact, legally divorced from the United States, but were still part of the United States, then Lincoln was a war criminal for invading Virginia when Virginia had never made any martial acts against ANY state or union of states.

Now, don’t get me wrong: I wish there had never been any secession (read my profile page). But I also know that the victors generally get to write the histories, with their own bias, and the North certainly did that.