The correct answer is A. Supported of slavery insisted It was moral because it was practiced in biblical times, while abolitionists argued that it was immoral because God created all people in His Image.
Explanation:
Slavery was a common practice during the 1800s in the Southern states that depended on it due to its economic model based on agriculture; at the same time, this practice was strongly opposed by the northern states that had an industrialized economic model. These opposite points of view about slavery were supported through different arguments including moral arguments that focused on whether slavery was ethical or "correct".
About this, people in the south and general supporters of slavery promoted the idea slavery was moral because it was a common practice during the history and was even part of the bible, which they consider as the law of God. On the opposite, abolitionists stated God had created all people as equal because everyone including slaves were made in His Image.
The colonists stole land and took food from the Indians
Explanation:
by fighting and seek to be there at like noon and seek to be there at all and seek to be there at the end you will follow cyan you can get
Even is he existed, he is dead for centuries.
Explanation:
- The lack of credible material and written sources related to the narratives of Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table might suggest that historical Arthur did not even exist.
- Yet, the prevalence of Arthurian legends in European culture require particular caution from historians who address the issue.
- Depending on what attitude historians have about oral tradition, its significance and role, different, sometimes even completely opposite, answers are formed to the question of whether or not legends are based on truth.
- Some historians still deny the existence of King Arthur today, while others emphasize his enormous role in sixteenth-century British history.
- The truth, as usual, is probably somewhere in between, so today is the most accepted viewpoint that speaks in favor of the existence of Arthur, but only as a warlord or local lord of some of the disparate areas inhabited by the Celtic tribes - the Britons.
Learn more on King Arthur on
brainly.com/question/558817
brainly.com/question/2673644
#learnwithBrainly
