You continuously claimed that the legislation passed by the CSA congress provided for the emancipation of the armed slaves, and posted the 4 paragraph quotation that instead prveed with no uncertainty that emancipation was not in that bill.
You then said the opposition in the congress was over "property rights" but you yourself posted how much property the CSA congress had already requisitioned from its citizens, the eggs and chickens and horses etc, and said you had leters proving this property was taken, which only proved beyond doubt that the CSA congress was NOT protecting "property", only a specific kind of property, one in which the congressmen themselves were heavily invested.
You then said the CSA congress was simply resisting surrendering to a "central authority" when they themselves were the very same central authority who had drafted whites, seized private property, and assumed control over the state militias.
Private citizens had to yield to the central government, the states had to yield to the central government, but the congressmen could write and apply the laws to exempt their own economic ndinterests, a you called it a stand on principle against the "central government"!!