You should try reading the resolutions of succession passed by the states that seceded. You know, the legal documents stating the basis of secession, and declaring themselves independent. Anyone who claims that the desire to preserve slavery had nothing to do with the reasons for secession is historically ignorant.
No you shouldn't. They are red herrings meant to push your gaze back to the "The war is only about slavery" misdirection.
As has been pointed out to you before, there are only 3, perhaps 4 with creative reading, states that issued these declarations, ( and i'm thinking they weren't even official acts of the legislature, but something put out by conventions committees) while the other 7 states issued no such documents.
It also misdirects attention away from *WHY* the North invaded. The "Union" was tolerating slavery for "four score and seven years." Why was the "Union" suddenly concerned about this thing it had always allowed, and indeed tried to reinforce by it's support of the Corwin Amendment?
The "Union" became against slavery when it was politically advantageous for it to spread this propaganda, but was indifferent or even supportive of slavery (See Corwin Amendment) when it thought it was beneficial for the Union to support slavery.
What this proves is that the Union motivation was not over slavery, and the only explanation left is that it was being motivated by money.