[FLT-bird]

The Confederate Constitution banned the slavery trade from anywhere it had been banned from prior to secessionist everywhere except other states. It also permitted states to join which did not allow slavery.

Why reject slavery forever when the Confederate Constitution offered no more protections for slavery than existed under the US Constitution?

[DoodleDawg]

The Confederate Constitution banned the slavery trade from anywhere it had been banned from prior to secessionist everywhere except other states. It also permitted states to join which did not allow slavery.

It did neither.

[BroJoeK]

FLT-bird: "Confederate Constitution …permitted states to join which did not allow slavery.
Why reject slavery forever when the Confederate Constitution offered no more protections for slavery than existed under the US Constitution?"

The Confederate Constitution added three new protections in support of slavery not found in the US Constitution:

1. Article 1, Sect 9(4) says no law can be passed against slavery.

2. Article 2, Sect 2(1) says no restrictions or limitations on slaveholders' travel & sojourn with slaves, anywhere.

3. Article 4, Sect 3(3) says slavery will be enforced in all CSA territories.

Lost Causers claim non-slaveholding states could join the Confederacy, but clearly if only theoretically, by accepting such "rights" of slaveholders throughout the Confederacy.

So on the question of which Constitution protected slavery better, even considering Corwin, there simply was no contest.
The Confederate constitution provided 1861 Fire Eater secessionists with every protection for slavery they believed was missing from the US Constitution.