Let me suggest the following as an even-handed approach to the topic. I've taken it myself and learned more than I expect. Instead of reading today's newspapers (an activity which often leaves me unsettled and disturbed), try reading antebellum newspapers printed just before the war. It's a relatively untouched and highly-useful encyclopedia of Southern culture, business, humor and politics.

My focus has been on Alabama newspapers. During the election campaign of 1860, little in them suggests significant support for secession. Writers debate whether or not the Southern States should support Stephen Douglas of Illinois. At issue is his position on "squatter sovereignty" or the right of citizens of a territory to prohibit slavery. In February of 1860 the Alabama legislature passed a resolution requiring the governor to summon delegates to a state convention upon the election of a 'Black Republican' or Northern sectional presidential candidate. The convention would determine Alabama's future course, in or out of the Union.

Language of the resolution clearly states that policies of the Republican Party are hostile to the institution of slavery and the welfare of the Southern States. With the presidency in Republican hands, Constitutional guarantees that a citizen could not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process would be abrogated. Republican majorities in many states had already nullifed the Fugitive Slave law and other compromises which had kept the peace in past years. Slavery per se may not have been the cause of secession, but Republican policies and practices concerning slavery clearly were. News being discussed during the late 1850s concerned little else.

To oversimplify a bit, the Southern position centered on the Constitution. If the Republican majority in Congress and in some states could flout the law and ignore Supreme Court rulings, they had no defense within the Union. In many parts of the North authorities did little to hinder terrorists inspired by John Brown who intended to shed Southern blood or die trying. If men in openly sympathy with abolitionist fanatics controlled the government, time had come to consider the best means of self-preservation.

People may disagree, but this course of action seems reasonable to me.

No sense in ducking and dodging. Ya'll can say what you want, but I've no problem with secession and the issue of slavery.

If I may introduce another question, I've never understood why anyone in the Northern states wants to be part of a country that includes the Southern states and their people.