Answer:
The debate over slavery divided the United States into two sides. The north emerged as the center of antislavery activity during the abolitionist movement. The abolitionists objected to slavery for moral reasons. They believed that it was an unjust practice that stripped humans of their dignity.
Explanation:
Slavery was practiced in British America from the beginning of the colonial era, and was firmly established when the Declaration of Independence of the United States was signed. After this, there was a gradual expansion of abolitionism in the North, that stated that slavery was contrary to human dignity, while the rapid expansion of the cotton industry since the 1800s caused the South to cling tightly to slavery, and try to expand it into the new western territories of the country. Thus, slavery polarized the nation into slave states and free states through the Mason-Dixon line, which separated Maryland (slave) and Pennsylvania (free).
There are no choices listed but if there is no separation of
powers in a government then that means that power will be in the hands of a
single entity. Even if there are
branches in that government, the one that wields the most power will be the one
ruling the country and with that there is a danger of abuse of power and suppression of human rights.
Preventing genocide is one of the greatest challenges facing the international community.[1]<span> Aside from the suffering and grief inflicted upon generations of people and the catastrophic social, economic and political dislocations that follow, this ‘crime of crimes’ has the potential to destabilize entire regions for decades (Bosco, 2005). The shockwaves of Rwanda’s genocide are still felt in the eastern parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo nearly 20 years later, for example. Considerable resources are now devoted to the task of preventing genocide. In 2004 the United Nations established the Office of the Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide with the purpose to ‘raise awareness of the causes and dynamics of genocide, to alert relevant actors where there is a risk of genocide, and to advocate and mobilize for appropriate action’ (UN 2012). At the 2005 World Summit governments pledged that where states were ‘manifestly failing’ to protect their populations from ‘war crimes, genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity’ the international community could step in a protect those populations itself (UN, 2012). The ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) project, designed to move the concept of state sovereignty away from an absolute right of non-intervention to a moral charge of shielding the welfare of domestic populations, is now embedded in international law (Evans 2008). Just this year, the United States government has stated that ‘preventing mass atrocities and genocide is a core national security interest and a core moral responsibility of the United States,’ and that ‘President Obama has made the prevention of atrocities a key focus of this Administration’s foreign policy’ (Auschwitz Institute, 2012). Numerous scholars and non-government organisations have similarly made preventing genocide their primary focus (Albright and Cohen, 2008; Genocide Watch, 2012).</span>
Answer:
if i live in a american community i would have
Writing and putting on a play.
Creating and exhibiting art works.
Creating and producing a show.
Producing a short film (a variety of subjects are possible).
Participating in writing, painting, ceramics and jewellery-making workshops and exhibiting the resulting creations.
Singing in a choir.
