Stephen Douglas accused Abraham Lincoln of wanting to “universalize” his anti-slavery policy

Stephen Douglas accused Abraham Lincoln of wanting to “universalize” his anti-slavery policy, which was certain to lead to political violence and civil war. As right as Lincoln might have been about the evil of slavery and the legality of banning it in the Western Territories, etc., was there something about his view of morality that always leads to conflict? Is Douglas-style moral relativism really the best way to avoid political conflict?
Abraham Lincoln may have lost the Illinois Senate race in 1858, but he definitely triumphed by becoming president and saving the Union in the Civil War. Still, whose argument is more prominent in our own time — Lincoln or Douglas? We certainly admire Lincoln more, but do we view morality the way he did, as a matter of reason and natural justice? Or do we think more like Douglas, looking more to popular agreement and even personal emotion to tell us what is right and wrong?

The post Stephen Douglas accused Abraham Lincoln of wanting to “universalize” his anti-slavery policy first appeared on COMPLIANT PAPERS.