Answer:I’d say A
Explanation:
In response to widespread sentiment that to survive the United States needed a stronger federal government, a convention met in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 and on September 17 adopted the Constitution of the United States. Aside from Article VI, which stated that "no religious Test shall ever be required as Qualification" for federal office holders, the Constitution said little about religion. Its reserve troubled two groups of Americans--those who wanted the new instrument of government to give faith a larger role and those who feared that it would do so. This latter group, worried that the Constitution did not prohibit the kind of state-supported religion that had flourished in some colonies, exerted pressure on the members of the First Federal Congress. In September 1789 the Congress adopted the First Amendment to the Constitution, which, when ratified by the required number of states in December 1791, forbade Congress to make any law "respecting an establishment of religion."The first two Presidents of the United States were patrons of religion--George Washington was an Episcopal vestryman, and John Adams described himself as "a church going animal." Both offered strong rhetorical support for religion. In his Farewell Address of September 1796, Washington called religion, as the source of morality, "a necessary spring of popular government," while Adams claimed that statesmen "may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand." Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the third and fourth Presidents, are generally considered less hospitable to religion than their predecessors, but evidence presented in this section shows that, while in office, both offered religion powerful symbolic support.
Answer:
British desire for natural resources, slave labors and political dominance brought about long-term effects to South Africa, the negative effects include widespread racial discrimination and economic exploitation, but there were few positive effects which were the advances in agriculture, mining industry and education.
Explanation:
Answer:
I'm guessing C becasue... you know
Explanation:
I believe that the answer you are looking for is Mixed.
I believe, I'm not 100% sure.
Answer:
Pro 1: NAFTA lowered the price of many goods.
Pro 2: NAFTA was good for GDP.
Pro 3: NAFTA was good for diplomatic relations.
Pro 4: NAFTA increased exports and created regional production blocs.
Con 1: NAFTA led to the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.
Explanation:
