The claims that the civil war was fought over states rights, not slavery, is silly. It’s akin to saying the cause of death in flu victims is coughing. What caused the couging though? Oh yeah, flu! Likewise, what was the right the states were most concerned about? The right to keep slaves! This was viewed as critical to their economic viability and was the result of a tremendous and sustained political stalemate in the nation. Bleeding Kansas, Missouri compromise, etc. Lincoln’s election signaled that the North was in political ascendancy and the stalemate on slavery was doomed. Best to secede now before it comes to that. So did the north march south specifically on a moral crusade to free the slaves? No, they did so to “preserve the union” after the southern states seceded. But let’s not forget why they seceded.
I agree with the Judge: the WAR was fought over Lincoln's despotic desire to maintain the union.
The South SECEDED over states rights.
You like analogies? Try this one that I posted on another thread:
For all the 'slavery was the cause' crowd, consider this hypothetical:
The state of Kansas passes a law granting the right of same sex couples to marry. Homosexuals only make up 3% of the population but 92% of Kansans voted for the law.
An amendment to the US constitution banning same sex marriage is subsequently ratified and becomes the law of the land.
Kansas declares that it is the right of the people of their state to decide who marries who and secedes.
Did the people of Kansas secede because A) states rights, or, B) they are all flaming homosexuals and desire to marry someone of their own sexual orientation?
I agree that the North forced her way onto the South, no state should have to fight her way out of this abysmal Union, yes, that it silly.
Like all people who think it is ok for the feds to intervene in states business as long as the "cause" is worthy, you forget one thing. The states alone had the constitutional right to decide whether or not they were free or slave. Thus the war was fought over states rights, whether the states seceded for a "worthy" cause or an evil one isn't the point. The point that statists, such as yourself, keep missing is that states rights take precedent over the feds, regardless of what that right entails.
Slavery would have died out of it's own volition in just a few years, without the loss of life and, more importantly, without the loss of the 10th amendment which we suffered through the action of the oppressive(yep, that's the word)Fed government under Lincoln.