"I prefer to face the slavery question directly, just as most people in the South did in 1860."

But How much more direct can you face the question of slavery?

You see Constitutionally Granted property rights were the heart of the slavery argument. Just because the newspapers and others plebian sources did not express the issue in such terms does not mean that it wasn't so.

With the United States Supreme Court striking down the 1820 Missouri Compromise, Which had established the admission of States to the Union as either a slave State or a free State based upon an arbitrary line drawn across the United States map, as being unconstitutional, Northern States such as Kansas could then decided where they wish to enter the Union as Slave States. Hence Bleeding Kansas and John Brown.

And the second ruling by that same body regarding Dred Scott reaffirmed the right of a person to carry his property from state to state and not be denied the use of that property. In other words a slave was not free simply because his master took him to a free states in the course of the masters business dealings. The master would only be required to free his slave while in a free state, only if the master became a citizen of that state.

In both of these rulings the Court reaffirmed the right of ownership of property, namely a slave, was a constitutional right which was granted to the individual for their state to regulate.

Both of these rulings were well understood by the southern people. And their impact was well understood as a defeat by the Northern abolishionist.

Yes the Southern people were apprehensive about Stephen Douglas' stance. Why shouldn't they be? They had these two reaffirmations that the United States Constitution supported and protected their position. Those Supreme Court rulings were the "Law-of-the-land" then as much as the Roe v Wade ruling is today regarding abortion. Why should they vote for someone who was wishy-washy on protecting their rights?

The election of Lincoln in effect told the southern people that their Constitutional rights were not going to be respected. The southern people were not Dumb by any means.

They knew exactly that the rule of law was not going to be observed. And that is why they, even the non slaveowning southerners, voted in overwhelming numbers to secede and form their own independent nation.

No, it wasn't about owning something as unimportant as a slave. Just as your actual owning a car is not as important as the principals behind allowing you to own a car and drive it on the public highways.

It was about something far more important. It was about Rights, Law, the Constition, and the roles of State and Federal Government. States rights and the right of slavery was simply the catchall phrases then which embodied these ideals.