[DiogenesLamp]

And with any decision there are consequences. No one stopped them seceding. But there were consequences. I personally believe if they had done it for good moral reasons they would have ultimately wound up winning and would have been a separate nation.

Had they remained in the Union, the nation may very well still have slavery. Would that be a "good consequence"?

It takes 3/4ths of the States to amend the Constitution. If the 11 slave states held together, it would require a 44 state Union for 33 state to outvote those 11 states and ban slavery. This could not have happened until 1896 at the earliest.

Had the five Union slave states also joined with them, it would have required a 64 state Union to outvote them. We do not yet have 64 states in the Union.

The Union was a slave Union. It would have continued being a slave Union if the South hadn't tried to become independent of Washington DC's control.

[Secret Agent Man]

You know very well the southern economies would not have allowed it to keep going much longer anyway. Even the folks FOR secession admit this in their excuse why the north shouldn’t have gone to war with the south over slavery.

[Secret Agent Man]

All the territories and future states could not have slavery.

You also assume Congress would not have made state boundaries and number of states different than what we have today to deal with an amendment vote sooner.

In any case it gets off my point that secession to keep slaves was one of the worst reasons one could pick to attempt secession. At least if it was a better moral reason even opponents could perhaps sympathize and maybe even have a lot of supporters for a good reason to secede. Enslaving other people does not allow that option.