Oh stop it. You are lying to yourself now. If you could be honest with yourself, you would admit that Slavery was going to remain in the Union indefinitely without secession.
Here is the hypocrisy of people like you. You claim that something which was *NOT* going to change, was the reason for starting a war that killed 750,000 people directly, and indirectly killed perhaps an additional 2 million.
There was no attempt by the Congress to abolish slavery. But you know what congress *did* do? They attempted to amend the constitution to PROTECT slavery, and you know what? It passed both houses of Congress, and five states voted *FOR* it, before they stopped trying to ratify the amendment to further protect slavery. Lincoln urged that this pro-slavery amendment be passed!
Just stop with your false "the Union was doing God's work and fighting for freedom!" bullsh*t.
In light of the facts, I would be embarrassed to keep claiming that the Washington DC power block was fighting to stop slavery. They were not. They were fighting to get back that slave produced money stream that was leaving them because of Southern independence.
Or would you prefer to believe that Washington DC was motivated by morals rather than greed? Cause if so, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I want to sell you.
By 1860 the US had a long history of state-by-state gradual abolition, and most Republicans like Lincoln expected that to continue into the future.
They were shocked then by the 1857 SCOTUS Dred-Scott decision, in effect nearly abolishing abolition.
As Lincoln said in his 1858 House Divided speech:
More babbling nonsense!
Slavery was the reason Deep South Fire Eaters declared secession, but it was not the reason the Confederate Congress declared war on the United States, May 6, 1861.
The reason for war, as Jefferson Davis clearly expressed was Confederate "integrity" which he considered violated, first at Fort Sumter.
Davis chose to start war at Fort Sumter and could have chosen to end it on any date before April 1865, but insisted to the end that only Unconditional Surrender, or "extermination" would do.
DiogenesLamp: "...and indirectly killed perhaps an additional 2 million."
Pure fantasy, unless you consider babies not conceived while their Dad's were off at war to have been "killed".
In fact there are no records of any numbers remotely approaching "2 million" killed "indirectly".
DiogenesLamp: "There was no attempt by the Congress to abolish slavery.
But you know what congress *did* do?
They attempted to amend the constitution to PROTECT slavery..."
The 1861 Corwin amendment was originally proposed by people like Mississippi Senator Davis in December 1860 as a "compromise" to prevent further secessions.
It failed for the Deep South, but did seem to help keep Border States in the Union.
Corwin was supported and signed by Democrat President Buchanan, then forwarded to the states by incoming President Lincoln.
Kentucky & Maryland ratified Corwin as did Ohio (Corwin's home state) and Rhode Island, though Ohio soon revoked its ratification.
Illinois' ratification is disputed.
DiogenesLamp: "Just stop with your false 'the Union was doing God's work and fighting for freedom!' bullsh*t. "
No, the total BS here is you Lost Causers' claims it's not true.
Of course the Union from Day One fought for freedom, freedom from the rule by slavers over Southern states.
In time the Union (including ex-slaves) also fought for the freedom of slaves from their slaver "masters".
The Big Lies here come from Lost Causers like DiogenesLamp claiming otherwise.
DiogenesLamp: "In light of the facts, I would be embarrassed to keep claiming that the Washington DC power block was fighting to stop slavery.
They were not.
They were fighting to get back that slave produced money stream that was leaving them because of Southern independence."
No embarrassment because the fact is your alleged "DC power block" fought first to stop slavers, then to free their slaves.
As for the money earned by Northeastern merchants on cotton exports, it was never given as a reason for any Union actions.
DiogenesLamp: "Or would you prefer to believe that Washington DC was motivated by morals rather than greed?
Cause if so, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I want to sell you."
Most Americans were motivated by the same principles & morals in the Civil War as in any other major US war -- World Wars One & Two for examples.
Sure, anyone can look for base motives in anything, but for Americans there are always higher goals too, freedom from slavers and freedom for slaves, for examples.