Explanation:
not at all it. depends on which context he said that..
if he said it based on discriminatory prospect than he could be..
but if he said it in order to symbolise people (as every people has some symbol to be identified) then not...
Substantive disagreement may never be resolved because it leads to clashes of opinions.
A disagreement or argument is said to be substantial if it centers on the presentation of divergent viewpoints regarding the truth or the adherence to opposing ideals.
There must be a means to distinguish substantive disagreement (SD) from conceptual disagreement if legal concepts can be the subject of SD. Arguments that persons debating a certain philosophical problem are only having a linguistic argument are one approach to reject the substantiveness of the issue. For instance, it has been argued that the seeming conflict over the mind/brain identity thesis is only a word one and that there is no real controversy over whether or not mental traits are the same as neurological ones.
To know more about Substantive disagreement refer to:
brainly.com/question/28085499
#SPJ1
Answer:
Terms in this set (10)
Citizens eighteen (18) and older (can vote). You don't have to pay (a poll tax) to vote. Any citizen can vote. (Women and men can vote.)
Explanation:
D because you vote did count which means more power in rich areas. I think this one is harder
