A strict constructionist is "Someone who follows the exact meaning of the law without applying personal opinion".
<u>Answer:</u> Option C
<u>Explanation:</u>
A particular legal theory of interpretation of justice that limits the interpretation of justice and demand from federal government to take constitutionally guided or ordered decisions only, is called as "Strict constructionism in the United States".
Strict constructionists are the legal personalities like judges who only elucidate legal texts as written and avoid strictly the context and the conditions. It is also used as a umbrella term in American politics for conservative legal theories like textualism and originalism.
Answer:lose because Kelly had no legal duty to rescue him
Explanation:Legal duty will mean that Kelly is in a position in which she is obligated by law to help Bob, which in this case there is no legal obligation over Kelly to help Bob.
The person you are exchanging with isn't your enemy
Answer:
<h3>The comparison and contrast of Davis and Moore’s functionalist perspective of social stratification with Mosca’s conflict perspective of social stratification lies on the concept of social position and power.</h3>
Explanation:
Davis and Moore's functionalist perspective of social stratification and Mosca’s conflict perspective of social stratification all emphasize on the presence of a power structure in a society which directly corresponds to the position of an individual. They all believed that society operates according to the social needs and that every individual performs their tasks accordingly.
The line of distinction between Davis and Moore's functionalist perspective and Mosca’s conflict perspective lies in the nature of men. Mosca believes that man is evil and dominating by nature and that compels him/her to misuse his position. He brings out the authority and power of the ruling class as an example to this argument. He argues that people in good position will eventually become more powerful as men are ambitious and selfish. They will gradually exploit people from lower position and use their power for their own personal gains.
While on the other hand, Davis and Moore argue that the greater the role of an individual is, the greater should be the reward. They illustrate the idea that people with bigger and greater roles should be given more importance because of their greater contributions to the society. Their perspective of social stratification emphasize that not everyone can perform the exclusive task of the doctors, therefore those who could perform such complicated tasks should be paid and rewarded more. Davis and Moore do not consider misuse of position and power by people of great influence.
In my opinion, Davis and Moore’s functionalist perspective of social stratification is more applicable and realistic. The fact that those who worked hard deserves a reward is a universal doctrine. These people spent a lot of effort and time before acquiring the position they are in today. Their effort and hard work should be rewarded greatly as they will contribute significantly to the society. Though, this perspective does not bring into account the chances of misuse of power and position, such elements can be controlled through efficient law and state control.
Cortez was thought to be a returned emperor from the Aztec past that promised to come back one day and return to his thrown. With this belief the Aztecs didn't <span>put up as much of a fight as they otherwise would have. Cortez also received</span>
