The Confederacy was About Slavery

And a happy New Year to you Farmerman and Setanta and all here.

And a happy New Year to you Farmerman and Setanta and all here.

So what? You had earlier alleged that southerners fought against what i believe you referred to as an "alien and intrusive" power. It was in the context of that excusing of southern militarism that i pointed out that they started the war.

How could the Confederacy be about slavery, meaning the Confederacy was about the perceived threat to the South's slavery, if in Lincoln's second term of office, many Union Democrats were not initially amenable to the 13th amendment?

youre comparing apples and razor blades

Please explain your flippant, in my opinion, comment.

Meaning, the thought on this thread has been that the Confederacy was about slavery in context of the Southern states believing that their peculiar institution was in some sort of jeopardy. What jeopardy, if the Union Democrats were not initially amenable to the 13th amendment?

On the 25th of July 1861 the US senate passed a resolution. The vote was 30 to 5 specifying that the war is not to end slavery but to preserve the Union. Lets face it, the emmancipation proclimation allowed the bordering states to keep their slaves. No slave was freed because of this proclimation. Politics! Thats what the war was about as is the true source of any war. Leaders simply use issues to rile up the emotions within individuals, infuriating men to the point where they take up arms to kill other men who were brain washed in the same fashion.

RESOLVED: That the topic of this discussion has always been THE CONFEDERACY WAS ABOUT SLAVERY.
After the Emancipation Proclamation became LAw on Jan 1, 1863 , the WAR grdually became about ending slavery. The US ARMY at that time became a police force to uphold and enforce the laws of the Union. Freeing the slaves became a mission. Then the 13th Amendment cemented it.

SINCE the EP was a law(and so written-) If youve ever read it, it clearly doesnt carry the poesy of many of Lincolns speeches . CAUSE it was written as a legal document that Lincoln expected to be tested in court and in the field.

Why the north fought the Civil War is totally irrelevant to the question of why the south seceded. There is no question that many people in the north had no interest in the slavery question, but then they weren't the ones who were seceding.

what?
states rights were in the constituion way before reagan

Sure Bubba, whatever you say . . .

Happy Birthday, General Robert E. Lee.....sorry, I could not resist.

When i was a child, this was a school holiday in Virginia.

For awhile in Virginia we had a Lee-Jackson-King holiday.

I've not lived there in more years than i care to reveal.

I have to agree with the original poster, I mean it's not like the first state to succeed, South Carolina, ever mentioned slavery. Not even as a reason to succeed in the first paragraph in their succesion document - hmmm what's this over at http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp? Why it's South Carolinas very own succession document! Hmmm, I wonder what the very first paragraph says...


The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled, on the 26th day of April, A.D., 1852, declared that the frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States, by the Federal Government, and its encroachments upon the reserved rights of the States, fully justified this State in then withdrawing from the Federal Union; but in deference to the opinions and wishes of the other slaveholding States, she forbore at that time to exercise this right. Since that time, these encroachments have continued to increase, and further forbearance ceases to be a virtue.

What're those last few sentences? Ehh probably nothing.

What's that old saying? Nothing succeeds like secession.

Succession?

whatever.

Maybe I should have said 'Nothing succeeds like secesh.'