From what I know, it’s just male supremacists who think women don’t have much part in society except to do housework and get abused by. It’s really bad.
Answer:
The correct answer here is A: the fact that the broadcast speech was only available to a limited audience.
Explanation:
When talking about freedom of speech vs. public interest, what judges need to evaluate, when making a ruling about a situation such as this, is how much the public is being affected and to what extent, as in number of people actually being negatively affected, in order to overcome freedom of speech. Freedom of speech, is a right covered by the Constitution, and its protection sometimes supersedes other rights. However, when the affectation is too broad, or can cause damage to other protected rights, depending on how the consequences affect people, and the number of people being affected, then a judge may see fit to curtail, or limit, the freedom of speech. In this case, because it was a limited broadcast, and there is the principle that these viewers could simply decide not to watch, or simply stop paying their subscription, then freedom of speech takes precedence since the damage is limited by numbers.
The major US. service program that sends (US citizens as) volunteers abroad (outside US) is Peace Corps.
They train their volunteers in the US before departure and provide support for and during the work. Currently Peace Corps sends their volunteers for example in Eastern Europe (Albania), Asia (Nepal), Africa (Morocco) and south America (Ecuador).
England.
Spain went to Mexico.
This argument is inductive. An inductive argument is a method of cognitive reasoning in which it is considered that the given premise serves as evidence that the conclusion obtained is correct. Although the argument seems correct by logic, the conclusion obtained is not always correct.
I hope my answer can help you.
