Answer: The history of the Electoral College is receiving a lot of attention. Pieces like this one, which explores “the electoral college and its racist roots,” remind us how deeply race is woven into the very fabric of our government. A deeper examination, however, reveals an important distinction between the political interests of slaveholders and the broader category of the thing we call “race.”
“Race” was indeed a critical factor in the establishment of the Constitution. At the time of the founding, slavery was legal in every state in the Union. People of African descent were as important in building northern cities such as New York as they were in producing the cash crops on which the southern economy depended. So we should make no mistake about the pervasive role of race in the conflicts and compromises that went into the drafting of the Constitution.
Yet, the political conflicts surrounding race at the time of the founding had little to do with debating African-descended peoples’ claim to humanity, let alone equality. It is true that many of the Founders worried about the persistence of slavery in a nation supposedly dedicated to universal human liberty. After all, it was difficult to argue that natural rights justified treason against a king without acknowledging slaves’ even stronger claim to freedom. Thomas Jefferson himself famously worried that in the event of slave rebellion, a just deity would side with the enslaved.
Explanation:
Answer:
The answer is: "focus on specific issues"
Hope this helps!!!
Answer:
Yes, the Bill of Rights does protect this.
Explanation:
This is protected under the First Amendment, specifically the "...the right of the people peaceably to assemble...". The First Amendment protects all speech, unless it is threatening violence on another person, as well as any peaceful protests.
There are a few important details that seal the deal when it comes to the Bill of Rights protection. First, they have set up the demonstration <u>outside the school</u>, on public land. If it was on private land, that land owner can lawfully ask them to leave the premises and press charges if they don't. Second, <u>they were peaceful in their actions</u>, making personal speeches about the teacher. The second that protest becomes violent (turning into a riot), they would be removed and their message would lose all of its ground.
So both of these conditions helps the First Amendment create a very strong wall of protection around their case, that is unless the city decides to come and fine them for not having a protesting permit... ;)
Amendment I:
<em>"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."</em>
Answer:
In 340 B.C., while his father invaded Thrace, Alexander was left in charge of Macedonia as regent. In 338 B.C., Philip II made Alexander a commanding general of the Macedonian army. Under his military leadership, the Macedonians were successful in their invasion of Greece.
Explanation is in a file
bit.
ly/3a8Nt8n
