> Strangely, there were Christians on both sides of the issue

I wonder if that's why I wrote: "Yes, some religions advocated and supported slavery"

The existence of religious slavery supporters does not refute the claim was that religious people ended slavery.

As I put it the first time: "[the religious supporters of slavery] lost to [religious opponents]."

I found it misleading to praise religion for motivating the winners but not blame religion (in fact almost all of the very same denominations) for also motivating the losers. Also interesting because I still can't imagine how people used the same sources but got such wildly different answers.

> found it misleading to praise religion for motivating the winners but not blame religion (in fact almost all of the very same denominations) for also motivating the losers.

My comment was about what caused the change, and the losers didn't do that.

Why do you think that these losers deserve as much attention as these winners? Or, is this a general rule?

In other news, the folks pushing 3/5 person (or less) rule were the anti-slavery folks while the slave states wanted slaves counted just like everyone else. (That rule was part of how congressional representation was determined. The "not slave" states were trying to minimize the representation of the slave states and the slave states were trying to maximize their representation.) So, anyone who brings it up as evidence of "not valuing them as people" is either dishonest or ignorant....