Answer:
The Quakers rejected slavery on the grounds that it contradicted the Christian concept of brotherhood.
Explanation:
The Quakers are a religious movement that originated among Christian English dissenters in the mid-17th century. At the end of the 1600s, many Quaker immigrants emigrated to North America, where William Penn founded Pennsylvania.
Quakers imagine that there is something of God within every human being, which, like an inner light, can guide one. The movement emphasizes that each person must find his or her own way to God, that God exists within every human being, and that the personal experience of God is the only guidance a human can have. Therefore, as God lived in every human, even in African-Americans, men were all equal and as a consequence brothers under God. This religious view, therefore, made them reject slavery during the 19th Century.
The Bronze Age is a time period that shows the ability of ancient cultures to create weapons and artifacts made from copper and bronze. This time period falls in between the Stone Age and the Iron Age. Its significance relies in its advancements it provided for civilization.
A would be correct. The US employed “island hopping” or “leapfrogging” tactics as a way to quickly move across the Pacific toward Japan. A small landing force could decimate a Japanese stronghold and replace it with an American base from which another landing force would launch. It cut back on cost and time, since a fleet wouldn’t have to return to a base thousands of miles away to refuel and regroup any longer.
<span> The American Colonist did not rebel against the British in the 1760's? They were not happy and protested Parliament against the Stamp Act which was repealed but they did not rebel until 1774.
In a nutshell they were subject to British Laws, British Taxes and not receive the same rights and representation of other Englishmen. But when asked to fight and die for England they were expected to line up dutifully. Well,,fight and die they did but their rights as free men. </span>
My position on the use of presidential pardon authority is of favourability; because this was granted by the Constitution which represents the Americans desires and philosophy of how the govern should act for the citizens and states interests and dreams.
Pardons tend to be controversial because as they overlay justice decisions the President can use the pardon and offer it for a person in the purpose of fulfilling, or attend his own interest or causes. Taking advantage of pardon for personal benefits.
One actual example of a president’s use of his pardon authority was the pardon granted for Former President Richard Nixon by President Gerald Ford on September 8, 1974 regarding any crimes he could have done in Watergate Scandal.
The pardon legally relates to punishment effects for a crime (if it is offered before a conviction it prevents the penalties and disabilities and if it is after a conviction it removes them).
The emotional issues that those most personally affected by the original crime may have toward the granting of a pardon can be vary.
In the case of Nixon critics claimed the pardon to be a “corrupt bargain” and later this seems to be the cause of peoples rejection of Ford and reason of the President losing the elections of 1976. While for Nixon was a great relive and an import act this pardon Ford gave him.
