Unusual, abnormal is something not used lightly and shouldn't because demonstrating abnormal behavior is something to be worrisome about.
Answer:
Witchcraft and magic are part of the anthropological understanding of society because they represent ideational systems in societies that do not follow the mainstream, established religions. Witchcraft or sorcery is applied to individuals with special talents and abilities to harness magical powers. Magic refers more generally to the existence of a metaphysical realm and being able to harness it.
Explanation:
Witchcraft and magic can be important elements of the belief systems in societies that are less complex than the urban and highly diversified societies that are dominant today. In the anthropological sense, magic generally refers to there being belief systems regarding the supernatural and metaphysical in the world and magic is employed in some means to harness or make use of that realm. Witchcraft refers to the group of specialists or conjurers in some societies who are masterful and have special skills and wisdom about the magical or supernatural realm. The term witchcraft tends to have negative associations in modern society but in anthropology, it is more of a technical, specific term to discuss the actors in belief systems that are not established religions.
Answer:
a. The Equal Protection Clause is a clause from the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause provides that "nor shall any State [...] deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
Its purpose is to apply substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Hence, in Shaw v. Reno, 509 U.S. 630 (1993), Supreme Court held that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause while bodies doing redistricting must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.
While in the case of Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001), Supreme Court held that the State violated the Equal Protection Clause in drawing the 1997 boundaries was based on clearly erroneous findings.
b. In the case of Easley v. Cromartie, an appeal from the decision given in hunt v. Cromartie was filed in the supreme court of the United States by Easley. In hunt v. Cromartie, the court held that the legislature of North Carolina did not use the factor of race while drawing the boundaries in the twelfth congressional district,1992. It was held by the court that the legislature did not violate the equal protection clause of the constitution and no evidence to prove that legislature set its boundaries on a racial basis rather than a political basis.
In Easley v Cromartie the appeal was that drawing the boundaries for voting violated the equal protection clause of the constitution. The supreme court of the United States held that the decision of the district court is erroneous because it actually relied upon racial factors and this is not in the interest of the state.
In Shaw v. Reno the court concluded that the plan of North Carolina tried to segregate the voters on the basis of race.
No because it's not really sweet plus it keeps you hydrated
