Answer:
<em>The</em><em> </em><em>reason</em><em> </em><em>is</em><em> </em><em>cause</em><em> </em><em>it</em><em> </em><em>which</em><em> </em><em>be</em><em> </em><em>snowing</em><em> </em><em>heavily</em><em> </em><em>there</em><em> </em><em>and</em><em> </em><em>cone</em><em> </em><em>shape</em><em> </em><em>helps</em><em> </em><em>in</em><em> </em><em>sliding</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>snow</em><em> </em><em>off</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>tree</em>
The correct answer is Luminous
Explanation: The mosaics have a very old origin. They were already called mosaics in Crete, Mesopotamia and, as we know, in Greece and Rome.
The Romans built the mosaics with small cubic pieces called tessela. The materials of these tesserae were limestone, stained glass, ceramic.
Paleo-Christian art, now able to enjoy greater financial bases and relegating fresco mural painting to the background, will seek to perfect the technique and will toast the interior of the church with intense and vibrant color images, possible by replacing marble with pieces of colored glass . However, this new material does not allow a complex palette of shades and the modeling of the figures loses their contact with the real world, the characters present themselves as transcendental, immaterial beings, inhabitants of a kingdom of light and gold.
Answer:
Juan should be told the rules and regulations, so it can guide her.
Explanation:
She will note that if she specifies the rules and explanations for her concerns, Juan will have a greater chance of complying. Juan is still 4 years old and at that stage of development, children needs to be thought by giving them instructions because they learn better through proper guidance and instructions.
Juan should be told what is right or wrong to do, and be guided appropriately well.
The fill in the blank is the separation of powers. Knowing this from the statement "<span>The power to enforce the rulings is vested in a separate branch of government than the power to issue the rulings."
Happy studying ^-^</span>
In order to answer this question, I will use two different perspectives of ethics: the consequentialist perspective, and the deontological perspective.
Consequentialism argues that the morality of an action lies with its consequences. This means that an action with bad consequences is an immoral action, and vice versa. In this case, killing the last remaining Redwood would not have any negative consequence on any being in the world, as no one benefits from it anymore. This means that the act is not immoral.
A deontological perspective states that there are principles that should be taken as rules, and which govern what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, rules and duties are central. For example, a principle might state that "all life is valuable." As the Redwood falls under the definition of life, killing it would be considered an immoral action.