“if the WBTS was about freedom, why did Lincoln and the northern states deny southern states their freedom?”
The freedom to enslave their fellow man? That’s not a “right” worth preserving.
The Civil War was about preserving the Union, as far has the United States was concerned. But for the Confederacy, it was all about Slavery.
OK. You totally didn’t follow along.
You wouldn't think so, but apparently the founders thought it was so necessary to preserve it that they wrote deliberate protections for it into the US Constitution.
The Civil War was about preserving the Union, as far has the United States was concerned.
But why did they have a right to do that, but the British didn't?
The Civil War was about preserving the Union, as far has the United States was concerned. But for the Confederacy, it was all about Slavery.
highball, from the beginning to the end, your post is absolutely correct. There just is no way to evade the reality that slavery is inherently wrong and, of course, incompatible with any definition of liberty or freedom.
I do not believe that there ever existed a legitimate argument in favor of secession under our Constitution. But, if there ever existed even a weak Constitutional argument to be made for secession, that argument was permanently trashed by people who stupidly chose to associate it with slavery.
The freedom to enslave other people! Where to begin?