I'm a huge U.S. Civil War history buff. I have been my whole life. I sometimes post on a Civil War forum, and not too long ago, there was a discussion of slavery in America. Like any decent human being, I was arguing against it. Then some neo-reb comes along, and tells me to read the bible. I've dealt with that type of person before many times. Some actually post quotes from the bible where it clearly supports slavery. I always tell them all they did was give an example of why some people are not Christians. And that I could post bible quotes that speak against slavery since the bible was written by so many different men. And in the 1830's, there was an abolitionist who wrote a book telling people the bible actually was against slavery.
 

It's typical that these Christians just assume everyone else is Christian, and that the bible is some type of good source of information. And it's disturbing that these people actually believe slavery is a good thing. These are the same people who also actually think the south is the Confederate States of America despite that they lost, and they truly believe the South is gonna rise again one day.
 
BTW - I'm a southern from Texas, so I'm not trying to offend any fellow southern's. I don't view the Civil War as a regional thing where it was everyone from the North fighting everyone from the South. I see it as a "You love America or you don't" thing, and there were plenty of Southern's who remained loyal to the Union, and fought for it, and there were also Northerns who joined the rebellion.
 
Many people believe Christianity has done more harm then good, and I would say one of the other evil things it's done is play a small role in the cause of the Civil War because many people on both sides thought they were doing God's work, but I am more then willing to not mind any brave Union soldiers who were religious that believed they were doing the work of God. If it helped them preserve our country, and end slavery, then good for them.
 
Also, many, many southern leaders defended slavery by using the bible as a back-up. Well, I prefer the quote by Lincoln.
 
"Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally". - President Abraham Lincoln

I blame the bible for most of the south's way of life. The bible promotes slavery, sexism, and homophobia. And the sad part is, there are plenty of people who think it's okay. Men and women who actually believe that there is such a thing as "Men's work" and "Women's work". That man and women have a certain role. That you choose to be gay.
 
I could go on and on about the evil's I've seen in the south my whole life. It makes me ashamed to be a southern sometimes, and makes me wish I could have been a Northern. But I realize there's ignorant people everywhere.

It is a shame that people base their whole view point on life based off an old book that they do not even know for sure is true.
 
Anyhow, I've been needing to rant about that for a while. Thank you.

Well, I believe that President Lincoln was just a product of his time. I know that the abolition of slavery was not the Union's primary goal at the beginning of the conflict, and the goal at first was to restore America. So yes, slavery was not a war aim, but war changes things. There was no point in trying unite the country by force all while keeping slavery in it's place.

I think around 1861-1862, Mr. Lincoln felt that freeing the slaves in the South was beyond his power. I also think after the U.S.A. was clearly losing the war, Lincoln felt it was time to make slavery an issue, and when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, one of his many goals with that was wanting to deny the rebel army the use of the slaves in any way, and he knew many slaves would run away, and support his cause.

I know his original plan was to ship free slaves to other counties, but I think after how he saw so many African-Americans were willing to fight and die for their own freedom, he changed his views.

I also don't think it's fair to blame Lincoln for the Civil War. It takes two to do the tango, and Lincoln bent over backwards to serve the south, but they were not willing to do the same, or compromise at all.

I am reading this book right now called "The Life of Billy Yank", (which is a collection of various letters U.S. soldiers wrote and sent to their loved ones during the war, as well as journal entries written by them. The book is also narrated by the author who explains who the men are, and the topic of their writings).....many of those men blame Jeff Davis for the war.

You should also remember it was the rebs who fired on Fort Sumter. That is what caused many men to join the U.S. army in the first place. Americans reactions were very similar to the reactions of Americans after the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the 9/11 attack. If the rebs never attacked Fort Sumter, a war may have never been fought.

The thing is, I am a very patriotic person, and a huge supporter of the U.S. troops.....past, present, & future. I have not always agreed with the Federal government. However, I would never consider treason again my country, so I cannot relate to Johnny Reb. I didn't always agree with what Bush did during his run, but that doesn't mean I'd wanna go support Bin Laden.

Also, I believe if there had never been slavery, the Civil War would have never happened, and there were many issues related to slavery that caused the conflict, and I believe if the rebs won, things would be much worst then they are now.

Slavery might even still be going on. No lazy, rich slave owner is gonna wanna give up his free help. I think if anyone tried, he'd reply...."Didn't we fight a war so we could have the right to keep our slaves?"

I also think the Confederacy would have been a strict Christian nation, and many of it's laws would be based off the laws of God.

Everything that is negative about the United States, apply all that, and make it ten times worst, and I think that is what the C.S.A. would have been like.

I'm all for people having the right to protest against what they believe is injustice, even if I do not agree with them. However, I do not believe in using violence unless it's in self-defense. Lincoln also once said to the south: "We are not enemies, but friends,” and promised he would respect their rights, but those rights, he said, do not include leaving the Union. The Union is “perpetual.” “I shall take care,” he said, “as the Constitution itself expressly enjoins me, that the law of the Union be faithfully executed in all the States.” Any act of violence against the United States, he warned, would be an act of rebellion.

I'd also like to add that the Constitution required Lincoln to take an oath "to execute the office of President," and, "to the best of his ability, to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." So, again, I believe Lincoln was doing his job, and had every legal right to preserve the Union. If anyone was breaking any laws, it was the rebs. Even Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson thought secession was unconstitutional.

Now there may have been a chance for the south to leave if they did not start using violence. All Lincoln did was stop the rebels from using violence and threats when they lost an election. They lost an election, then attacked a U.S. fort, and threatened to invade the capital. That's an illegal rebellion. Not legal secession. If anyone thinks it is legal to attack a U.S. fort, then I welcome them to try it, and see what happens to them.