No, Shelby. Slavery was a legal property status. The Emanicipation Proclamation freed slaves in the Confederacy as a military action. The Thirteenth Amendment emanicpated all slaves within the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment extended due process and equal protection to all U.S. citizens, which now included the former slaves. I can't understand how anyone who took Const'l Law could be so ignorant.
I CAN understand, though, how someone who took Constitutional Law doesn't know squat about what ACTUALLY occurred. The following might help your very ignorant hiney, though:
"The Thirteenth Amendment completed the abolition of slavery in the United States, which had begun with President Abraham Lincoln issuing the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. Shortly after the amendment's adoption, selective enforcement of certain laws, such as laws against vagrancy, resulted in blacks continuing to be subjected to involuntary servitude in some cases, particularly in the South.  See also Black Codes.
11. Carter, William M. Jr. (2006-2007), Judicial Review of Thirteenth Amendment Legislation: Congruence and Proportionality or Necessary and Proper, 38, U. Tol. L. Rev., p. 973 , http://heinonlinebackup.com/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/utol38§ion=64
The black codes had their roots in the slave codes that had formerly been in effect. The premise behind chattel slavery in America was that slaves were property, and, as such, they had few, if any, legal rights. The slave codes, in their many loosely-defined forms, were seen as effective tools against slave unrest, particularly as a hedge against uprisings and runaways. Enforcement of slave codes also varied, but corporal punishment was widely and harshly employed to great effect. 
Please. Much more than racism remained. I'm not trying to make this into a lesson on the history of U.S. slavery... but you should certainly not try to fool these people here into thinking the Con Law overview of the 13th Amendment did anything more than touch on the legislative aspects of the law. It did NOT go into the realities of slavery itself... or even things like the Black Codes or Jim Crow. Stop postulating just because you went to law school. I did, too... and so what? I know about U.S. slavery because of my FAMILY... not because some law professor lectured on the 13th Amendment.
There were attempts to educate former slaves through the Freedman's Bureau and church groups. The historically black colleges in the South were established. Southern whites and blacks were thrown in poverty. Many became sharecroppers. A sharecropper is not a slave or a serf. There are such moving accounts in govtl records and fiction of what freedom from slavery meant to blacks.
Many became sharecroppers... and many didn't. Many went to school... and many didn't. Don't wander down this lane, madam, because your tiny tender heart can't handle it. If you want to believe the 13th Amendment brought days of "joy-joy", you're fooling yourself. Was it the BEGINNING? Yes, absolutely. But THAT particular change didn't come easy... OR overnight... to this country. Take a class.
Travel was possible. Families could stay together.
You're kidding... right?
I don't believe that most whites would be happy to be a former slave.
Most whites wouldn't be happy, nor would ANY blacks. I would not want to have been a U.S. slave, either. But that has nothing to do with the manner of slave I am... and I call myself. Which, although your JW-I-need-to-control-not-only-what-others-think-but-what-they-say-even-about-themselves baggage will not allow YOU to grasp. On another thread a poster referred to himself by the "n" word. Didn't bother ME... but I sure didn't hear "you all" pop a gasket over that. Oh, right, I know... "Where? Where did someone use that term? I certainly didn't see it because if I saw, well, I would...!" What? You would... what? I know: you would want to mind your own business. If someone on this board wanted to call themself a dog's hiney... what it is to YOU??
The legal status was radically different.
The LEGAL status often didn't mean squat. Ask Emmett Till. Or any of the other pieces of "strange fruit."
The Internet is not a great place of scholarship. There is nothing wrong with an Ivy education. Elementary school students can explain the difference between slavery and degrees of freedom.
It's not a bad place, either... and no, there is nothing wrong with the EDUCATION; it's just the ignorance of the so-called "EDUCATED", at least, in this case. And an elementary student's understanding of slavery is most probably limited to the VERY limited exposure he/she has to the U.S. institution of slavery and perhaps... maybe... some of the modern-day human trafficking. However, there is a LOT his/her DON'T tell... as well as a lot of lies.
But if you have such a poor view of internet scholarship, try reading a little James Lowen. Start with Lies my Teacher Told Me, winner of the 1996 American Book Award, the Oliver Cromwell Cox Award for Distinguished Anti-Racist Scholarship, and the Critics Choice Award of the American Educational Studies Association.
Attack my university knowledge as much you want.
I don't have to; you keep putting it's deficiencies on display.
It highlights your ignorance.
No, it actually highlights yours, at least with regard to this topic. I truly MARVEL that you even took this one on. But, well, your Ivy League education says you even know all there is to know about slavery. But Dan Quayle went to law school - yet, couldn't spell "potato." I went to law school, too... and marveled at how many of my classmates consistently got reamed out because they couldn't spell... or even write coherently (which is how many pass the bar - they write SO poorly and simply include underlined buzzwords - everyone knows that one secret to passing the bar... even you).
No one needs to be an elite to know that the Civl War accomplished a major social, economic, and legal change in the United States.
Only the elite believes it accomplished what you want folks to believe it did when you want them to believe it did.
The federal government was enhanced. Our Const'n was transformed. States were clearly not as powerful. The Bill of Rights applied to states only after the Civil War.
And you think that changed everything, right then and there. Interesting.
Why do I have to constantly relate basic American history that first graders know. You embarass yourselves.
Because you can only related what you know... which is about only that which a first grader MIGHT know (although, I think if you asked a first grader they wouldn't... except maybe one that attended an elite school; even then, I don't think they're told all that much, either. "Class, the Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves (it didn't) and the 13th Amendment abolished all slavery (it didn't... in this country OR others)!"
The world is not engaged with what verses in Revelation mean, any more than the world is engaged with how bad university is.
Perhaps not the world YOU live in, but I would wager that there are some who are so engaged. Many, actually. The world in not made up of all atheists, yet, madam. Even so, the OP had a right to post as to whatever he wished... and that included a discussion about Revelation 13. I asked his permission TO discuss and he conceded. That YOU have now come in... and "decided" that "the world" isn't engaged is... arrogance at its height. If YOU didn't want to discuss the topic, YOU should have kept your silly hiney off the thread. Didn't your high-falutin' edu-macation teach you THAT?
Throughout the world people want and value education.
Some do. Many, yes. Not all. And YOU don't even speak for MOST.
So you devalue it as the Taliban and Al-Qaeda do.
You're a liar. You're just mad because I have refused to be your friend. And this is why: you whine and cry "please let's be friends; others no longer 'like' me - we could stand against them together"... while out of the same mouth you try to appear as an opposer. THIS is why I would NEVER accept your crazy butt "offers." Because you don't know what YOU are or what YOU want.
Pesky little facts inconvenicence you. You keep pushing the JW agenda.
I am pushing nothing. I shared the truth with another (not you - you get nothing from me... which you simply cannot stand)
You apparently do... because although I've asked you... several times... to stop addressing, PM'ing and otherwise trying to "talk" to me... because what you say in one place is ENTIRELY different than what you say in another... gets on my last nerve. But... you don't/won't/can't... because you need ME, apparently.
A few people first out.
Why condemn the WT b/c they would not have you while you make up the same garbage as the WT?
Oh, no, I'm not like you, madam... you who are condeming me because I won't have YOU (and, yes, I STILL decline your silly "offers"). I condemn the WTBTS because it's an institution of false christs, led by false christs who are false prophets. Same as you do. Unlike YOU, though, who apparently can't decide who your friends are (this week)... I have not changed my position simply because someone I don't care for is also "against" them. I don't base my position as to false christs and false prophets on who I'm getting along with, this week - they are false, regardless of whether another agrees with me or not.
You, though, need to decide who your friends are. One day you hate the WTBTS, then the next you're taking issue with me for doing the same thing, while defending them... because I won't be your friend. Then you're condemning others... while the next day taking issue with me because I won't join with you against them. Yet, neither group would have YOU... any more than they would have me. Which is why you now want to join up with me.
But I told you: I'm not playing this passive/aggressive bullock pucky game with you. You're nothing more than an opportunist, running from camp to camp and trying to make friends by means of common enemies. Which is a puerile, manipulative, and deceitful practice... and I don't care what words you use to try and "sound" all intelligent, it won't change my impression of you. Just becuase folks here might not know the tactics we learned in law school, you know I do. And your ad hominem and deflective attempts mean nothing to me. You are a two-faced, double-speaker... more than any I have known since middle school... and I want no part with you.
So you can come onto thread and posture all you want - I DECLINE YOUR OFFER. I told you, go this route if you want to... but I will "out" your butt just as quickly.
A doulos of Christ,