I'm going to help you get the answers but the answers are too much to type out for you.
Answer:
no
Explanation:
im gonna be labeled racist for this but some of them were good in their own right, multiple of our founding fathers (including George Washington himself) had slaves. Do you see people trying to go against the very man that is a huge reason the US exist? so no
The best answer would be D.
The debate over whether a bill of rights should be added to the Constitution or not, started from some delegates' beliefs that guarantees of certain basic rights were missing from the ratified Constitution. They wanted some amendments to be included, in order to secure those liberties to the citizens.
The Federalists (those who supported the ratification of the Constitution) argued that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights because the people and the states kept any powers not given to the federal gonvernmnet. Alexander Hamilton, for example, argued that because the proposed federal government would possess only specifically assigned limited powers, ir could not threaten the fundamental liberties of the people. Anti-Federalists, however, held that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty and the power of the states.
They aren’t as great as they seem
Answer:
Adopted by the United Nations in 1948, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) represents the first attempt to set international standards for human rights. The document guarantees these rights to all people regardless of their country or any distinction such as religion.
Explanation:
