Answer:
Gods' blood is called ichor
Answer:
First, one has to be clear about what we are talking about. In a pure democracy, the people simply decide together what they are going to do. The rule of law matters a little but not terribly much in that situation since if there are any disagreements about what we all agreed to, we simply get back together and decide again. In practice, of course, a pure democracy does not work for anything more than a very small group.
What we generally mean is a representative democracy, or a republic. This means that there are certain people elevated to positions of authority and decision-making for society (temporarily) based on democratic selection. What makes their power temporary? What ensures that they only exercise the power they are supposed to? What prevents any of these people from becoming dictators? We may want to say that they only have the powers that we grant them democratically but ultimately those individuals in power are the ones that control the process. Democracy at a large scale, even with respect to just elections, only works if there are established procedures that are strictly followed. The principle of the rule of law means that at the most basic level we all agree that the laws as written down are what “rule” everything and everybody. Nobody can change that fact. So if some individual chooses to say they have some god-like authority, our society as a whole will not follow them because we all agree the Constitution supersedes their opinion about any authority they believe they should have. It is a fundamental social contract that we all share that makes our laws work and makes it theoretically impossible for somebody to become a dictator. Without this implicit social contract, the Constitution and the laws mean nothing.
NOTE: We tend to associate other ideas like “equality before the law”, “civil rights”, and other ideals with the rule of law. While the rule of law can help enable these things, they are not the same thing nor are they specifically part of the rule of law. The rule of law can allow and even enable inequality before the law (as it did in the Roman Empire) and a variety of other things we consider wrong. In fact the rule of law does not even have anything to do with democracy at all. It is simply a principle that allows a stable, functioning society by establishing that we all have to live by the agreed-upon standards. But as stated, a representative democracy cannot function without it.
Explanation:
Salah - 5 Prayers
Sawm - Fasting during Ramadan
Hajj - Pilgrimage to Makkah
Zakah - poor tax + donations
Khums - wealth tax (1/5th)
Jihad - struggle to please God
Amr-bil-Maroof - encouraging others to do good
Nahi-Anril-Munktar - discouraging the bad
Tawalia - loving the friends of Allah and family of Muhammad
Tabarra - hating the enemies of Ahl-al-Bayt
Answer:
A theme within <em>A Raisin In The Sun</em> is dreams
Explanation:
A Raisin in the Sun is named from a 1951 Langston Hughes poem titled Montage of a Dream Deferred, and dreams play an important role in the play. "What happens to a dream deferred?" the poet wonders in the poem, which also acts as the play's epigraph (a citation at the beginning of a book that elaborates on its primary themes). thinking about whether it will shrivel up "like a raisin in the sun" or erupt. The linked and competing desires of the Youngers drive the storyline of Hansberry's play, which is based on Hughes' unanswered question. Each character has their own goals that have been put on hold owing to the family's socioeconomic limits imposed by bigotry. Despite the conclusion's forecast of future challenges for the Clybourne Park family, the endurance of these ambitions gives the play a pervading feeling of hope. The drama is around Mama and her late husband Big Walter's goal of acquiring a home. Mama recalls Big Walter's comment that it appears "like God didn't see fit to give the black man nothing but dreams," tying the postponement of her dream to racial inequity, as she clings to a dream she hasn't had for over 35 years. Ironically, it is Big Walter's death, and the $10,000 insurance money that follows, that allows Mama to realize her ambition at the end of the play. Ruth, like Mama, clings to the idea of owning a house, which causes friction with her husband, Walter Lee, who aspires to be a self-sufficient company owner. Walter's ambition to operate a liquor shop (one of the few economic opportunities available to an African-American male in mid-century Chicago) contrasts sharply with his sister Beneatha's ambition to become a doctor. However, by the end of the play, Walter's squandered investment has jeopardized both his and Beneatha's aspirations, putting a pall over the play's semi-optimistic climax, which focuses on Mama's realized dream. With the insurance money gone, Walter and Beneatha's future plans look to be in jeopardy, evoking bigger fights with socioeconomic forces beyond the individuals' control.
Answer:
A
Explanation:
Because that's Nelson Mandela fought for was to end Apartheid In South Africa so that the black south Africans could live freely and in a fair land
