Pick your own debate... Regarding history!

Resolved: In the War Between the States, should we assume a moral high ground to exist (. http://en.wikipedia.org...), the South had a higher moral ground than the North. Contention 1: The Southern states had the right to secede. The right to secede is not forbidden from the States in the Constitution; therefore, by the Tenth Amendment [1], the States had the right to secede. Additionally, Virginia, New York, and Rhode Islan all included clauses in the ratifications that reserved the right to secede from an oppresive government [2a]. Finally, New England also threatened to secede from the Union during the War of 1812 [3a], so to disallow the South to secede would be hypocritical. The reason the South seceded was to cancel high tarrifs that favored the North more than the South. There was nothing unconstitutional about this act of secession, so Lincoln had no right to send armed troops into the South. Contention 2: The North cannot be justified through anti-slavery The concept that the war was fought to free the slaves is false. The border states kept slavery during the war, but remained in the Union [4]. If the war were about slavery, these states would have been kicked out. The reason the North was against slavery in the territories, as David Wilmot said, was not about "morbid sympathy for the slave. " He said, "I would preserve to free white labor a fair country, a rich inheritance, where the sons of toil, of my own race and color, can live without the disgrace which association with Negro slavery brings upon free labor" [2b]. The official goals for the War Between the States, as outlined by the Crittended-Johnson Resolution [5], was not to interfere with slavery, but to preserve the Union. Abraham Lincoln expressed no sympathy for slaves at all [6][2c] (both sources use the same quote). Now, one prominent abolitionist, William Lloyd Garrison, said that abolition would be easier with a dissolved Union, because the North would no longer be obligated to return slaves to the South, increasing the cost of enforcement of slavery, so that slavery would collapse [2d]. This happened in Brazil with the lack of enforcement of a fugitive slave law, ending slavery within four years [2e]. Lincoln went against this, and ultimately caused more harm to slavery than good. Contention 3: The South behaved more properly in the war Now, the fact alone that the North was the one forcing the South into the choices of war or tranny makes the North lower on the moral grounds than the South. Additionally, General Benjamin Butler issued Order Number 28 [7][2f], giving Northern soldiers a "right to rape," which violates the European code of war conduct. I'll stop there. Good luck. 1. . http://www.usconstitution.net... 2. The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. a. The War Between the States, pg. 63 b. The North-South Division, pg. 45 c. The War Between the States, pg. 66 d. The War Between the States, pg. 64 e. The War Between the States, pg. 74 f. The War Between the States, pg. 72 3. The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers, by Brian McClanahan a. James Madison, pg. 150 4. . http://en.wikipedia.org...(American_Civil_War) 5. . http://www.history.com... 6. . http://www.lewrockwell.com... (Lincoln's Views on Blacks) 7. . http://pages.warbetweenthestates.com...