[katana]

Which State's right other than the right to maintain the holding of slaves (rights of personal property to a slave holder) was exactly in dispute ? Secession was a result not a cause. The south's inability to maintain an effective veto over slavery within the Union was the reason they picked up their marbles and left.

To argue that slavery, which was recognized from the time of the Articles of Confederation and the later formulation of the Constitution as something that would eventually split the country wide open, was unimportant to secession and civil war is either obtuse or ignorant.

It was certainly important to my great grandfather who lived in a slave state that did not secede (Kentucky) and fought in a Union regiment against neighbors and kinfolk. We've been voting Republican for around 140 plus years as a result. So please don't try to lecture me about the Civil War. I've got history handed down in my family from people who fought it.

[katana]

PS: Aric2000 ... If you think slavery was unimportant to secession and civil war because Jeff Davis didn't mention it in this overlong and badly written speech, then you must not know that what a politician avoids mentioning, like the elephant in the corner, is frequently the most important thing to note.