Answer:
Chryseis and Briseis are the two girls in Iliad 1 around whom the quarrel develops. Neither has a name of her own: Chryseis means daughter of Chryses (the priest of Apollo) and Briseis is "daughter of Briseus". Chryseis' father asked Agamemnon to give her back, and offered a huge reward.
Explanation:
This is an opinion question, so I gave an explanation on both sides. Yes has 169 words, and no has 174!
YES:
Yes, I believe that TV ads promoting junk food should be banned. They actively promote unhealthy foods in a subtle way. Younger kids watching TV can see the ads with popular faces (Their favorite cartoon character, actor, or other people they look up too), then falsely assume that the junk food is going to be good for you. After they take in the mentality that junk food or unhealthy food is good for you, it will be implemented into their mindset and as they grow up- this will stay with them and promote an unhealthy eating habit. If we banned these ads, there would be advantages and disadvantages. Some advantages would be that the younger generation could possibly grow into healthy eating habits in an easier way or the ads also mess up our body’s way of understanding how hunger feels and can trigger mindless eating. Some disadvantages will be a decrease in junk food ads, less commercial jobs for actors, and a less popular demand for the foods.
<h2>
-----------------------------------</h2>
NO:
No, I do not believe TV ads for junk food should be banned. Kids from the ages 5-14 should not have to worry and be scared about their intake of food, if we do ban those ads it will promote insecurities in eating foods and not only be scared of eating the food for health reasons, but for being shamed or bullied by society. Not only are junk foods when eaten in moderation not detrimental to health in most kids, but when they're going to be taken away it will cause the kids who've become dependent on them for snacks for when they can't cook and don't have help cooking all the time to have to struggle to find something to eat. Of course, banning the ads will have pros and cons, but I truly believe that the cons outweigh the pros. The pros such as promoting a healthy eating habit, showing kids to eat healthy, etc., is VERY important, but there are many many ways we can do this without banning the ads.
<h2><u>
If I helped, please remember to thank, rate, and mark my answer as brainliest if seen fit.</u></h2>
Answer: Choice A
Choice A goes over a negative aspect about wild animals, while choice B talks about a slight positive aspect in that certain animals can be kept as pets. The two don't really fit together.
In other words, choice A is saying "don't get a wild animal as a pet" while choice B does the opposite (more or less).
While it is true that you can keep some animals as pets, it's not a good idea as choice A mentions. Also, there's the fact that the animal may attack you or people you know if the animal is provoked (even then wild animals can attack seemingly at random). Lastly, there's the fact that wild animals prefer living outside with lots of room to roam around. They don't like being caged up and need to have a specific habitat and diet. All of these facts lean toward having wild animals as pets is a bad idea. This is especially true for large animals in which you'll need more resources to take care of them. A zoo is better equipped to handle the animals.
Answer: it is shown the lives refugees turn "back again" when they create new lives for themselves The book inside out and back again connects fleeing to being "inside out" since the war makes them leave their homes, and then they are able to come "back again" by creating their new life.
Explanation:
The internet
