The case you describe is: SWEATT v. PAINTER
Details:
The case of <em>Sweatt v. Painter (</em>1950), challenged the "separate but equal" doctrine regarding racial segregated schooling which had been asserted by an earlier case, <em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em> (1896).
Heman Marion Sweatt was a black man who was not allowed admission into the School of Law of the University of Texas. Theophilus Painter was the president of the University of Texas at the time. So that's where the names in the lawsuit came from.
In the case, which made its way to the US Supreme Court, the ultimate decision was that forcing Mr. Sweatt to attend law school elsewhere or in a segregated program at the University of Texas failed to meet the "separate but equal" standard, because other options such as those would have lesser facilities, and he would be excluded from interaction with future lawyers who were attending the state university's main law school, available only to white students. The school experience would need to be truly equal in order for the "separate but equal" policy to be valid.
In 1954, another Supreme Court decision went even further. <em>Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka </em>extended civil liberties to all Americans in regard to access to all levels of education. The <em>Plessy v. Ferguson </em>case had said that separate, segregated public facilities were acceptable as long as the facilities offered were equal in quality. In <em>Brown v. Board of Education</em>, segregation was shown to create inequality, and the Supreme Court unanimously ruled segregation to be unconstitutional. After the Brown v. Board of Education decision, there was a struggle to get states to implement the new policy of desegregated schools, but eventually they were compelled to do so.
Answer:
B.
Explanation:
"Things change because they are not complete; but their reality can only be explained as part of something that is complete. It is God."
Rememeber that Aquinas (as most of medieval philosophers) was influenced by Greek philosophers, especially Plato and Aristotle. To better understand why this quote better epxlain Aquina point of view we must remember the Aristotelian natural theology in which Aristotle expose his point of view about God as "the unmoved mover".
The "unmoved mover" concept is very interesting because in it God is not only the creator of all (as we commonly know from the bible), but it is also part of it all:
All that exist´s is created from God; but since all is created from him, everything that exist´s is a part of him, and the whole universe is no other thing than him, fragmented throughout the universe.
Known for the pre historic ruins of the Aztec capital
Answer:
Right to freedom
Right to life
Right to the pursuit of happiness
Explanation:
The right to freedom is where Thomas focuses and manages to describe in a philosophical way that man is free by nature and that no state or government can give or take away that right, it is a natural state which cannot be removed by any law.
The right to life is the right of birth given by God and that the whole society must unite so that it continues, nobody has the right to remove it or give it only the same nature
To seek happiness without leading to the total anarchy of the human being, man has a purpose and a reason for life that he must seek without affecting the general society and must have clear objectives in order to achieve his natural objective of existence
