I have no idea of what you point is here. Not quite two years into the rebellion, Lincoln issues his Emancipation Proclamation as a war-time measure to free Southern slaves that might have been used to further the rebel war effort. Nowhere in that document is there anything about "rights" for the freed slaves. In fact the 3/5ths rule remained in effect until the 14the Amendment. But as free men and women then the newly emancipated slaves did count as a whole person because they were no longer property.
The point here is obvious to someone not brainwashed in deliberate propaganda. The point is that the Union had no concern for the lives or rights of slaves until it became good propaganda, good war tactics and good politics to have a concern for their lives and rights.
The Union tolerated their condition for four score and seven years, until a piece of it wanted to leave, then suddenly what was completely tolerable for them became an ex post facto casus belli. It gave them an after the fact justification for chasing down and beating that runaway slave.
This is what is known as "selective morality." Slavery only became objectionable to the Union when it was needed as a tool to justify the abuse they put the country through. It's apologists have been hyping it ever since.