Answer:
I mean debate can encourage new laws but if you have one side wishing for laws and the other against it. It will usually slow legislation which is entirely the purpose. But it depends on what view are you taking it from because th end result can be no legislation at all or even a relaxation of legislation in fact that's happened in some states. So it depends on the view and narrative you wish to push. because it can be a semblance of all but B. If you're a centrist you'd probably say this debate will encourage new laws but the whole point of not wishing for infringements upon one's rights means no new laws. If you wanted new laws then this debate is a waste of time but you're angering a large portion of the population because you seek not to listen to the statistics and thereby information one may have that may dissuade from the legislation. And if you look at D it can be so. If 2 cannot agree then rights will not be infringed upon. Unless the side with more representatives that disagrees with the right then such laws will be enacted. Yes, they can place new restrictions and there you can make the case it's unconstitutional and etc because well there is ground and a foundation laid upon there. But as far as an actual thing it'd be A I suppose. But I'd question the teacher because it depends on how one views a division. It can be either cooperative relationships that can be mended or an all or nothing if it's not my way then we will have conflict and it shall erupt. It all depends.
Explanation:
Answer:
There wasn't a victory.the Europeans exhausted themselves. The US only prolonged the conflict for about a year, at which time the Europeans thought that an armistice was the only way to not perish. The real victory came in 1919, when President Wilson went to Versailles to hold court and chop up the map of the world in the image of a racist, imperialist, white, Western European/American hegemony, complete with “reparations” that assured the flow of gold primarily out of Germany, and primarily into the US. Wilson was able to hold the dominant position at Versailles because the US was one nation that was not utterly spent, in terms of men and material and resources.
Explanation:
Answer:
I think it is a, barber shop. I could be wrong
Explanation:
Well the CCC gave lots of jobs to people during the depression, so during WWII, when Men were away at war, Women somewhat stepped into the Men's shoes at jobs such as in factories, this is also where we start to see the development of Rosie the Riveter, a tough factory woman; this painted a new image for woman as well, since before then their common spot was at home.
