Lincoln was not in favor of abolishing slavery - a point he made over and over again. Slavery forever was in fact the first bargaining chip the North/Republicans/Federal Government offered up. It was rejected - because slavery wasn't really what anybody was fighting about.
I know, I know, it was about states rights, but from their pint of view those states rights included slavery. It was really about controlling their tariffs and setting their own trade policy.....about not being taxed for the benefit of others. And most of the states did not mention slavery as a reason. You mentioned that several times in your other post. Do share, what is the state's right they seceded over? Certainly Virginia did not say they were leaving because of slavery. They said they were leaving because the Federal government had become tyrannical. "and the Federal Government, having perverted said powers, not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern Slaveholding States." Their words, not mine.
President Lincoln had to deal with a population in the North that wasn't all in for abolishing slavery, and as a politician he talked out of both sides of his mouth. Yes I admit it. Not everyone in the North was the good guys.
Frederick Douglas understood this, and explained it better than I ever could, so I'll let him speak. If you don't want to read the entire document, the 14th paragraph will do.
Oration in Memory of Abraham Lincoln
The bottom line, the CSA was defeated, and slavery was abolished. Pointing out anything else is nothing more than wasting bandwidth.
Slavery forever was in fact the first bargaining chip the North/Republicans/Federal Government offered up. It was rejected - because slavery wasn't really what anybody was fighting about.
Right. They just accidentally abolished it in this country forever, at least until the free traitors brought it back.
It was really about controlling their tariffs and setting their own trade policy.....about not being taxed for the benefit of others.
Here are some of the comments from those documents.
From Texas: "They have for years past encouraged and sustained lawless organizations to steal our slaves and prevent their recapture, and have repeatedly murdered Southern citizens while lawfully seeking their rendition."
From Mississippi: "It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction."
There's your "state's rights" argument.
Just search for "slaves" and "Negro" in these documents for many more.
So why would they damn themselves in the eyes of history by saying all of this, if they didn't think it was right?
Do you agree with these statements? No? Then you would have been assaulted or lynched in the Confederacy for it.
And that's what's so frustrating. You would never agree with any of this, yet instead of disavowing it you want to pretend it didn't happen. Well, there is your "state's rights".
Certainly Virginia did not say they were leaving because of slavery.
They said they were leaving because of the treatment of slave holding states. What did the other four say they were leaving over? Their states rights and Constitutional rights to own slaves, so yes, it was about slavery.
And even if only four of the states said it was about slavery, then it was about slavery.