[Rebelo3]

Concerns about slavery was a cause for SECCESSION, but Linclon's unlawful effort to hold property which was clearly the Southern States share of the federal pie, and his unlawful, unconstitutional, and immoral invasion of the Southern States to "save the union", mostly for economic reasons, was the cause of THE WAR.
But simple minds want simple answers so we get "the war was about freeing the slaves" BS.
DEO VINDICE!

[marron]

Concerns about slavery was a cause for SECCESSION

his unlawful, unconstitutional, and immoral invasion of the Southern States to "save the union"... was the cause of THE WAR

OK. Slavery was the cause for secession. The war started, not when the South seceded, but when Lincoln sent the military to stop it.

No argument.

So, for the South, the war was about slavery, and the right to spread the practice into the western states.

Although the North was opposed to slavery, and to the spread of the practice into the western states, for them the war was about saving the union. As has been pointed out, when the Union was at stake, abolition went to the back burner, to the consternation of the Radical Republicans.

But slavery is the elephant that came to dinner. Without slavery, there is no war to defend it, no secession, no war to save the union. Whether for economic reasons, or any other.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Concerns about slavery was a cause for SECCESSION, but Linclon's unlawful effort to hold property which was clearly the Southern States share of the federal pie, and his unlawful, unconstitutional, and immoral invasion of the Southern States to "save the union", mostly for economic reasons, was the cause of THE WAR.

Ft. Sumter was a federal fort.  Why did the people of S. Carolina attack it after Lincoln was elected?  According to Article I of the constitution, the feds are required to put down rebellions.  According to the 9th and 10th amendments all rights and powers not delegated to the feds belong to the people and states.  The states had no powers to make treaties, conduct war, etc., so guess who was violating the constitution?  And if you want to talk about corruption and states rights violations, just look at the south from about 1850 - 1860.  They did their level best to tromp on northern states rights.

But simple minds want simple answers so we get "the war was about freeing the slaves" BS.

The north wanted to keep the Union together, the south wanted slavery uninterfered with in their own states, the territories, and in any northern states that they brought their slaves into.  Don't believe me?  Read the Crittendon Compromise.  Sounds like the authors of it, all of Congress and most of the people of the time were these "simple minds" that you talk about.