The very existence of this thing disproves the prevailing interpretation of history. It is not the smoking gun, it is the magic bullet itself. A whole version of history lies dead in the corner with Lincoln bent over it.
The same neo-confederate BS that I have grown so tired of hearing here. Lincoln did not vigorously endorse the Corwin Amendment. He only said that he did not care one way or another, but if could have convinced the states that had already declare secession to return to the union, he was not opposed. The amendment was only proposed to reassure the South that the Federal Government had no intention of abolishing slavery.
In fact, there was no possible way the Federal Government could have abolished it before secession.
Congress would have never given the necessary 2/3 majority of both houses, and with 15 out of 37 being slave states, there was no chance of gaining the necessary 3/4 of state ratification necessary to ratify such an admendment to the constitution.
Your drivel about Lincoln supporting Corwin is a standard Lost Cause tactic to confuse those who do not know history or are totally ignorant of the constitutional process.
Lincoln did not come into office promising to end slavery. His only pledge was to end the expansion of slavery to the territories.
That, and that alone is what the Confederates went to war over.
Read about the Corwin Amendment here.
Learn the facts and please stop spreading misinformation.
The circumstance for his supposed detachment made his declaration of disinterest ridiculous.
The amendment was only proposed to reassure the South that the Federal Government had no intention of abolishing slavery.
And so it was in perfect agreement with Lincoln's pledge. To add apologetic to denial is to poison the one and waste the other. Please explain why a reason someone might support the amendment helps prove that someone didn't.
In fact, there was no possible way the Federal Government could have abolished it before secession. Congress would have never given the necessary 2/3 majority of both houses, and with 15 out of 37 being slave states, there was no chance of gaining the necessary 3/4 of state ratification necessary to ratify such an admendment to the constitution.
All the above is irrelevant to the issue of whether Lincoln supported the language.
Your drivel about Lincoln supporting Corwin is a standard Lost Cause tactic to confuse those who do not know history or are totally ignorant of the constitutional process.
The constitutional process is irrelevant to the issue of whether Lincoln supported the language. You continue to do what you did with arderkrag in #45. Continual insults, derision, and accusations of ignorance are not going to win any arguments worth winning.
Lincoln did not come into office promising to end slavery. His only pledge was to end the expansion of slavery to the territories.
And so his pledge was in perfect agreement with the language of the amendment.
That, and that alone is what the Confederates went to war over.
Read about the Corwin Amendment here.
Yeah, the letter writing campaign in which he told every one pertinent to the amendment process about this amendment he didn't really care about and that he didn't care about it. He was even more weirdly adamant about not really caring about it in his first inaugural, because, you know, the inaugural address of a president in a time of national crisis is the perfect occasion to bring up the matter of an amendment to permanently alter the Constitution and perhaps prevent the ruination of the whole country when one doesn't care about it so much that it becomes necessary to point out how much one doesn't care. It goes further than that; Lincoln actually claimed to not even know the language of the proposal - by the time he gave the speech!.
I think he was lying.
Learn the facts and please stop spreading misinformation.
Your feelings about facts are not, themselves, facts.