The answer to this question would be choice B. Declaration of Sentiments
At the time the Declaration of Sentiments was proclaimed (which was during the Seneca Falls Convection of 1848) many women were seen inferior to men. (in other words, they weren't believed to be equal to men). Moreover, in an attempt to prove this notion wrong, leaders Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott decided to arrange the Seneca Falls Convection.
To add on, the Declaration of Sentiments (as you could probably infer from the question), basically stated the following "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men AND WOMEN are created equal...", thus it greatly resembled the Declaration of Independence. Furthermore, this notable document was a significant step toward women enfranchisement and equality as the work of those who advocated women's suffrage would have their work paid off in 1920 (the year in which the 19th amendment was ratified, which granted women the right to vote).
Answer:
If the president vetoes a bill, the Congress shall reconsider it (together with the president's objections), and if both houses of the Congress vote to pass the law again by a two-thirds majority, then the bill becomes law, notwithstanding the president's prior veto.
Explanation:
No, the freedom of speech is one of the most important rights in a democracy along with the freedom of press. It allows several voices to rise and be heard. But it does not means that you can say whatever you want whenever you want.
You can find the foundations of the freedom of speech in the first amendment where it says:
<em>"Amendment I
</em>
<em>
</em>
<em>Congress </em><em>shall make no law </em><em>respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or </em><em>abridging the freedom of speech</em><em>, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" </em>
But there are exceptions to the rule. You can´t say whatever you want as the supreme court have showed in several cases. From this we can extract some categories where the first amendment doesn´t work:
- Incitement: When its directed to inciting or producing inminent lawless action.
- False statements of facts: there are some types of this unprotected according to the supreme court: those said with <em>"sufficiently culpable mental state" </em>can be subject of criminal or civil liability. Secondly libel and slander and finally negligent statements or facts can be subject of civil liability.
As a conclusion we can say that the freedom of speech is a fundamental right in a healthy democracy but we must take care of it. We can´t say whatever we want, well actually we can but you have to be responsible of your acts.
