I'm sorry, but anyone that cannot recognize that slavery was the only reason for the civil war is simply deluding themselves.
Yes, yes, state's rights, industrial tarriffs, property rights, the 10th amandment, etc etc; but every single arguement resolved down to slavery and the economics built upon it.
It was only the war that ended the evil of slavery and it was Linclon that made certain that slavery was ended.
Thank God for Abraham Lincoln.
Didn’t South Carolina explicitly state they were seceding from the union because of slavery?
You realize the exact same argument would have been made for King George had England won the revolution right?.
I don’t deny that slavery was the main reason behind secession but to claim men can be forced into a “Union” under threat of death or imprisonment? That’s an argument of oppression. Why not support extortion while you’re at it?
Have you ever considered the words of the Battle Hymn of the Republic?
As He died to make men holy, let US die to make men free
Union soldiers were fully aware they were fighting to end slavery. Historical revisionism is irrelevant.
Slavery was made legal again in the 1960s.
Would anyone condone a person who sent the equivalent of 8,000,000 men today to death for ant reason short of mass murder?
Lincoln was a foul human being who like Obama could not accept people who did not bow down to him. He suspended habeus corpus illegally, instituted an income tax illegally, and directed atrocities to be committed against the southern people. He condone the rape of southern women by Sherman’s army. He should be considered a war criminal rather than an honored President. But, winners get to spin their own truths. Just ask Obama.
I must respectfully disagree. I think that the matter is a little more complicated.
First, the Southern Democratic candidate in the 1860 election was John C Breckinridge of Kentucky. He had become a fervent States Rights advocate in the 1850s, but he owned no slaves (Bell of Tennessee, the candidate of the Constitutional Union Party, who owned slaves, attempted to make an issue of this fact, arguing that he could protect slavery better than someone who did not own any). If slavery is the only reason, then why are the Southern Democrats nominating someone who doesn’t own any?
Second, Virginia, at a secession convention, voted by a 2-to-1 margin on April 4, 1961, to not to secede. Fort Sumter is fired upon on April 12. Lincoln called for troops to be furnished by the non-seceded states on Apirl 15, and on April 17, the secesion convention voted to secede, subject to a state-wide referendum, which approved secession in May.
The status of slavery had not changed between April 4 and April 17. Virginia’s actions indicate that, while the central question, slavery in itself was not the only issue.
Yes, yes, state's rights, industrial tarriffs, property rights, the 10th amendment, etc etc; but every single argument resolved down to slavery and the economics built upon it.
I'm with you on this - anyone who thinks it wasn't 'slavery' needs to read the Lincoln/Douglas debates... It was only the war that ended the evil of slavery and it was Lincoln that made certain that slavery was ended.
Thank God for Abraham Lincoln.
I'm with you on this - anyone who thinks it wasn't 'slavery' needs to read the Lincoln/Douglas debates... You're right - Thank God for Abraham Lincoln.