Answer:
We have to answer if the response choices to this question are:
a) Open-ended
b) Scale
c) Contingent
d) Fixed
And the correct answer is:
b) Scale
Explanation:
The response choices are of scale-type because they represent a gradient (or a scale).
They are meant to express the level of unsafety that the elderly experience in their neighborhood, and go, from the highest point the scale (a great deal), to the lowest point in the scale (none), with two options in the middle acting acting as a bridge between the two extremes (Some, Not too much).
They stayed strong and fought for what they believed in. They didn't back down when they were told that they would fail. They weren't afraid to lose their lives for freedom and love and they were willing to do anything to make sure their families were free and protected.
Answer:
It stopped states from preventing former slaves and poor people from voting.
Explanation:
The Twenty-fourth Amendment made it possible for all people to vote without prohibitions based on prejudices and intolerance. The biggest advance was that <u>no one could stop former slaves and poor people who could not pay taxes to vote.</u>
This Amendment stated that everyone had the same right when it comes to voting. As seen in the quote, the voting right is before any else and all citizens must have it.<u> This shall not be depended on any reasons, including not paying taxes. With this, </u><u>all people who could not for various reasons and circumstances, pay taxes properly beforehand, had the secured right of voting.</u>
AGRARIAN
adjective
1. of or relating to cultivated land or the cultivation of land.
synonyms: agricultural; rural; rustic; farming; countryside
noun
1. a person who advocates a redistribution of landed property, especially as a part of a social.
Sometime in the mid-1970s the term peace process became widely used to describe the American-led efforts to bring about a negotiated peace between Israel and its neighbors. The phrase stuck, and ever since it has been synonymous with the gradual, step-by-step approach to resolving one of the world's most difficult conflicts. In the years since 1967<span> the emphasis in Washington has shifted from the spelling out of the ingredients of "peace" to the "process" of getting there. … Much of US constitutional theory focuses on how issues should be resolved – the process – rather than on substance – what should be done. … The United States has provided both a sense of direction and a mechanism. That, at its best, is what the peace process has been about. At worst, it has been little more than a slogan used to mask the marking of time.</span><span>[2]</span>
