[ought-six]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. In your post #150 you said in 1848 when Lincoln approved of rebellion, rebellion was not the same as secession. When I pointed out to you that Lincoln (and pretty much everyone else in the North) considered the Confederacy “in rebellion,” you then must necessarily have agreed that rebellion and secession were, indeed, synonymous. You can’t in one post say they were not the same, and then in a subsequent post say they are. (Well, you can say it, but it destroys the basis of your argument.)

[Non-Sequitur]

When I pointed out to you that Lincoln (and pretty much everyone else in the North) considered the Confederacy “in rebellion,” you then must necessarily have agreed that rebellion and secession were, indeed, synonymous.

Say what? The Southern acts in 1861 were rebellion. Secession is legal, if done within the bounds of the Constitution. Rebellion is not.