<span>Without amendments, we are stuck with what some guys thought would be nice over 200 years ago. A few things we took out of the constitution by amendment: Slaves count as 3/5 of a person. The incoming president must wait five months after being elected to take office. Electoral college for senators (now--can we get rid of it for presidents?) We also filled in holes that were evident in the constitution, and clarified more rights that people have. The Bill of Rights is all amendments--they wanted a working government first before they decided what limits to put on it. Women were allowed to vote. Someone figured out that if a president becomes sick but doesn't die, the government is in limbo, because the VP couldn't just do the President's job until an amendment was passed saying how it would be determined the Pres was too sick to do his job. Allowing amendments allows mistakes made by the writers of the constitution to be corrected, and for changes they didn't forsee to be allowable.</span>
The correct answer is - Kublai Khan promoted religious tolerance and exchanges between Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, and Hindus.
Kublai Khan, and pretty much all the rulers of the Mongol Empire, even though mostly are portrayed as savages and barbarians, were actually one of the most tolerant of all in there time towards the different cultures and religions, and never made problems to the people they were ruling over on this basis. The Mongols can even be seen like globalists, and they encouraged cultural exchange, religious exchange and tolerance, and were trying to create an environment were people from different ethnicity, cultural and religious backgrounds would live in peace and harmony, and through it to create a unified empire.
Had many fires and new laws introduced
