Also, let's not forget that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation did not free the slaves held by the Northern States. So, if they fought to end slavery, why weren't the slaves freed?
Here is an excellent link to show what the Northerners were doing. If you to it you can read the proclamations and see where no one was actually freed. Also there is an account in there of Northerners going on a riotious spree and killing hundreds of blacks, I'll give you just a highlight.
Brief blurb from the article.
What Lincoln was saying was that in territories that he had absolutely no governing power he was declaring slavery to be abolished immediately. In territories in which he had governing power, the areas of the United States and areas of the Confederacy which were presently under U.S. military occupation, were "left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued" or slavery would remain untouched.(snip)
The angry mob burned fine homes, business buildings, the draft office, a Methodist church, a Negro orphanage, and many other buildings. A Negro was hung, then burned as people danced around the burning body. More than thirty Negroes were killed - shot, hung, or trampled to death. It had been reported that Negroes were hung from the lamp posts along the streets. The mobs grew to an estimated strength of between 50,000 and 70,000. For three days they swarmed through the streets, setting up barricades on First, Second, and Eighth Avenues, where sometimes a force of only 300 policemen would have to face 10,000 attackers at a time. Some troops filtered into town, and the crowds took to alleys and rooftops where they killed soldiers with bricks and guns. The gangs caught the colonel of a militia unit, stomping and beating him to death. After dragging him to his home, men, women, and children danced around his body. Eventually, enough troops arrived to put an end to the rioting. Casualties were heavy -nearly 2,000 people were dead from the melee.
I've never denied that atrocities happened in that war, but if you are going to post what one group did, then also make sure that you post what the other side did. Think too, that not everyone felt the way your example did. By pulling one man out of war and holding him up as an example of what every man in that war believed is misleading and inaccurate.
Granted. But why did the wing-nuts over at the "League of the South" recently help erect a statute to Nathan Forrest? Certainly, nailing black folk to logs and setting them on fire isn't part of your "heritage."