I never said we were right about Slavery, but here’s a little known group of Facts...
#1: The first slave was owned by a BLACK man
#2: Not ONE slave was brought to America under the Stars and Bars they were all brought here under the Stars and Stripes
and
#3: General Grants wife refused to free her slaves, they had to be taken by force. A fact that has now been scrubbed from the History Books.
And those facts prove what? Slavery was right? And you states were under the stars and bars when your plantations were taking in slaves.
And thanks for glossing over the rest of my comments where I agree with you that there can be valid reasons to secede, and the south had some, but they also had a very bad invalid one.
Fact is the south would’ve given it up soon anyway, slave labor was unable to keep up with industrialization.
That's because the importation of slaves was made illegal in the United States in 1808, 20 years after the Constitution was ratified. The flag under which the majority of slaves were imported was, in fact, the British one. And one of the main conduits ran, oddly, through the state of Rhode Island, also the first state to make it illegal and the first to declare independence from the British as well.
That is not to ignore a rather vigorous activity in smuggling of slaves, two hotbeds of which were Charleston and New Orleans. But that was small potatoes compared to the original importation.
As to the overall issue of the continuance of the institution of slavery, however, the Stars and Bars absolutely does hold a responsibility - I cite the Texas declaration of secession as a specific instance.
As far as the first slave being owned by a black man, you are referring, I believe to Anthony Johnson, who is recorded as owning slaves in the mid 1600's. He was, however, brought over as a "servant" himself - the definitions were very murky at that time, and no one differentiated between indentured servants and slaves. He was among the first to own servants formally designated as "slave" but the real "credit" of being the first slaveowner in America is, I am afraid, lost to time. If I had to grant that title to somebody he would probably be Spanish. Which stretches the definition of "America" - this is a debate that will never really be resolved.
Perhaps you could provide a reference for your #3?