> I'm not so sure that the states would not have resolved it [slavery].
Opinions among historians seem to vary, but the impression I've gotten (albeit not with any careful study) has been that the slave states likely would have been extremely slow to abolish slavery, because:
1) the dollar value ascribed to enslaved people represented a huge proportion of the wealth of politically-powerful slave owners; and
2) many non-slave-owning voters in the slave states --- all white males, of course --- aspired to become slave owners and thus tended to sympathize with the interests of slave owners.
Oops. I meant that I'm not sure the state's would not have resolved gay marriage, not that I'm not sure they would not have resolved slavery. I've edited my comment to clarify.
Opinions among historians seem to vary, but the impression I've gotten (albeit not with any careful study) has been that the slave states likely would have been extremely slow to abolish slavery, because:
1) the dollar value ascribed to enslaved people represented a huge proportion of the wealth of politically-powerful slave owners; and
2) many non-slave-owning voters in the slave states --- all white males, of course --- aspired to become slave owners and thus tended to sympathize with the interests of slave owners.