Slavery, the Civil War, and States' Rights

The Civil War was similar to the abortion issue in that you had two opposing sides who disagreed not on the nature of one thing, but on the relative importance of two things. The trap is in arguing about either one of the two things. In abortion it is quite possible to be both pro-choice and pro-life; I think most people are.
Similarly in the Civil War it is quite possible to be pro-States’ rights and pro-human rights; again, I think most people are.
The first struggles of the Civil War were actually the nogotiations nearly 100 years before to hammer out the Constitution. An uneasy negotiated settlement was reached, without which; it is useful to recall, there would have been no United States (the Articles of Confederation), which would probably have had even *worse* implications for universal freedom.
The Civil War proper was the other shoe finally dropping on a foundational question from 100 years earlier, which had festered into an unsustainable division.
The States’ righters were correct in their argument concerning States’ rights. The abolitionists were correct in their arguments about freedom. The economics of both sides had an influence in the adoption and support of those views by either side.
But where the rubber hits the road is when a leader like Lincoln decides that the Constitution is not a suicide pact, that a States’ nominal right to secede must be trumped by the Union’s right to exist and that some dishes are going to get broken along the way.
It is not at all hypocritical now for States’ righters to argue that Lincoln was 100% correct back then. Only a fool substitutes a position for a principle.
Our Constitution is designed to protect the rights of individuals–not groups. Where States’ rights protect individual rights, they may trump the Feds. But where the USG is in a better position regarding individual rights than the State, then IT is more closely hewing to the intent of the Constitution.
My bottom line: the States’ righters were correct in their arguments on specifics. They were incorrect in elevating that position above the principle for which the Constitution was designed, and which is the only reason we have States, States’ rights, or a Union of States.