Given that "States Rights" often equals "States Wrongs", you have a fair observation.

States thought they had a "right" to slavery - they were wrong.

Brewha wrote:

"In his remarks to Democratic lawmakers the day before they passed the health care bill, President Obama said: "I was tooling through some of the writings of some previous presidents, and I came upon this quote by Abraham Lincoln: 'I am not bound to win, but I'm bound to be true. I'm not bound to succeed, but I'm bound to live up to what light I have.' "

The Lincoln quotation was stirring. It was also bogus. There is no documentary evidence that Lincoln ever said any such thing."

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125169095 

In his new book Wealth and Democracy: A Political History of the Rich, Kevin Phillips fell for one of the numerous bogus Lincoln quotes that fill the literature on The Great Emancipator. The historian Paul Kennedy fell for it, too, in his review of the Phillips book in the New York Times.

The bogus quotation is: "The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace, and it conspires against it in times of adversity. It’s more despotic than monarchy. It’s more insolent than autocracy. It’s more selfish than bureaucracy…. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow…."

Phillips thought he could attach the moral authority of Lincoln to the theme of his book, but as historian Matthew Pinkser wrote on the website, History News Network, on June 3, the quote is nowhere in Lincoln’s collected works, and his official biographer called it "a bold, unblushing forgery."

That same statement is true of a great many other supposed Lincoln quotations in the literature. In his 1989 book, They Never Said It: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, and Misleading Attributions (Oxford University Press), Paul F. Boller, Jr., devotes the better part of a chapter to fake Lincoln quotes.

For decades, scholars and journalists have been quoting Lincoln as saying, "All that loves labor serves the nation. All that harms labor is treason to America." Labor unions have repeated this quotation endlessly and have published it hundreds of times, but "there is no record of his ever having uttered these words," concludes Boller.

More...

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2002/07/thomas-dilorenzo/abeolony/ 

At least 8 of the states that succeeded mention Slavery as a primary reason in the Articles/Ordinance of Secession... But sure... Slavery wasn't the issue.

drglnc wrote:

So what? There were people who were concerned about Lincoln's true intentions as President as far as slavery even though he said he wasn't going to interfere with slavery where it existed. Nobody really trusted him much except maybe that 39% who supported him in the popular vote.
Lincoln's white supremacist "free soil, free labor" policies were tied to the expansion of slavery Westward because he and the many Republicans wanted the Western territories to be exclusively for white labor, and the soil free of blacks, slave or free.

A great example of this is an excerpt from a speech made by a Republican Lincoln supporter, named Judge Tracy. This was published in the Republican newspaper, the New York Tribune on June 8, 1860. The whole speech is even more revealing of the Lincolnian Republican mind at the time, but I only have a PDF clipping image of the original article and haven't written it all down as text.

"God taught us that the country was to be the country of freemen. It is not with us a question of [N_WORD] it is a question of white men. It is a question of whether we are to live and prosper, whether we are to have free homesteads with our wives and children, with our enjoyments and with our hopes clustered around our own hearth stone, or whether this blight of negro slavery is to be extended over us to crush out the hopes of white men for ever."

They also feared that if slavery was expanded into new Western states that these new territories and states would be aligned with the Democrat Party and the South and the Northern Republican aligned states would lose more power in D.C. as a result.

So yes, slavery was an issue for some but for different reasons. It really came down to a political power struggle, not some high-minded moral crusade to free the slaves. There were very few true abolitionists compared to those that were most interested in gaining political power and the money that could come with that or those that didn't care about slavery one way or another.

RayR wrote:

Illegal taxes

ZRX1200 wrote:

so we agree... Slavery was the Primary reason for secession of the traitor states...

drglnc wrote:

From the 1870s to the late 1950s, there was an unofficial truce between the North and South. Each side recognized and saluted the courage of the other; it was conceded that the North fought to preserve the Union and because Old Glory had been fired on, and the Southerner fought for liberty and to defend his home; the two great heroes of the war were Abraham Lincoln and Robert E. Lee; and the South admitted that slavery was wrong but never conceded that it was cruel.

Around 1960, the Democratic Party—led by Lyndon B. Johnson—advanced the modern incarnation of identity politics. It worked very well for them. In the election of 1956, 75% of African-Americans voted Republican. By 1964, more than 90% of them voted Democrat, and they have been doing so until 2020. As part of their effort to control and manipulate the black vote, the Leftists and their myrmidons advanced the myth that the Civil War was all about slavery. It wasn’t. It was, in my opinion, about money, more than anything else. Now, at this point, I know some of my liberal friends will bristle up and say: “It was too all about slavery!” Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but let me ask you this: What was slavery about?

ANSWER: It was about money.

The “it was all about slavery” argument is an oversimplified and infantile claim that has duped many people. Those who subscribe to this flawed theory ignore one undeniable fact: history is messy. It is almost never as simple as the modern Left would have you believe. Oh, sure, slavery was an issue, but it was certainly not the only issue and not even the dominant one. Listed below are eleven others:

More...

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/why-the-civil-war-wasnt-about-slavery/ 

You don't read so good. 👀

RayR wrote:

Emancipation Proclamation did not come out until later in the war. Both sides were running out of Cannon Fodders...

Staes Separated and went to war because the southern states did not want this newly formed government to infringe on their rights. the North was standing by the newly afformed Government. our Constitution. Both sides had slaves at the time..

RiverRatRuss wrote:

so we agree... Slavery was the Primary reason for secession of the traitor states...

drglnc wrote:

That is hilarious coming from a guy that says Slavery wasn't the primary issue when the states themselves said it was in the very documents that explain why the wanted to leave the United States...

drglnc wrote:

ACADEMIA’S ABSOLUTE PROOF that the War Between the States was fought over slavery is based primarily on the declarations of causes for the secession of four of the first seven Southern states to secede: South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi and Texas.

However, those four declarations prove nothing of the sort.

There were 13 Southern states represented in the Confederate government. That 13 included Missouri and Kentucky, which were divided states that did not actually secede. They remained Union slave states – two of six Union slave states – the entire war (WHAT! UNION SLAVE STATES! I thought the war was fought over slavery with the Union fighting to end slavery! Man, they should have started with their own country).

In fact, three of the six Union slave states – New Jersey, Kentucky and Delaware – had slavery several months after the war. It took the second 13th Amendment in December 1865 for slavery to end in those three Union slave states.

Remember, the first 13th Amendment was the Corwin Amendment that left black people in slavery forever, even beyond the reach of Congress, in places where slavery already existed. It was passed by the Northern Congress, ratified by several states and strongly supported by Abraham Lincoln before the war made it moot.

The Corwin Amendment was the true feeling of the North on the slavery issue though it is only one small piece of the irrefutable evidence that the North did not go to war to end slavery.

More...

https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/secession-declarations-do-not-prove-the-war-was-over-slavery/ 

So you are saying you are wrong to call it the "Civil War" as it really was the "War of Norther Aggression"?

Brewha wrote: