A new book is being released that claims that when Lincoln’s father-in-law died, Lincoln sold his slaves as administrator of his estate. Robert E. Lee on the other hand in the same position, freed his father-in-law’s slaves in accordance with his will.
And of course, Lincoln was under a legal obligation to administer the estate in accordance with the decedent's Will and to maximize the estate's value for its heirs.
So, you praise Lincoln for being willing to engage in a war that killed 800,000 Americans in order to free slaves but absolve him of fault for being unwilling to even resign as administrator of his father-in-law’s estate to avoid having to sell other human beings? You seem quite morally flexible. Of course, so was he.
