Answer and Explanation:
Hello. You did not provide the text to which the question refers, which prevents the examples and textual evidence from being accurate.
Although the three people mentioned in the question above fought for civil rights and an end to racism and discrimination against blacks, they had different opinions on how this fight should be carried out.
Rosa Parks was in favor of civil disobedience and the refusal of blacks to submit to what whites imposed on them. However, Rosa did not engage in violent movements, nor did she blame them, for her the purpose justified the means, provided that the rights of blacks were taken care of.
Martin Luther King advocated a peaceful struggle, without violent methods and cherishing the safety and peace of all involved. He believed that freedom and rights are not fought for by provoking violence, as it destroys everything good that can happen.
Malcolm X, on the other hand, defended an armed struggle, where civil rights would be enforced in the country, through not only civil disobedience, but violence for those who tried to prevent blacks from gaining their rights.
Answer:
I believe the best option to be letter D. He asks questions that are difficult to answer to help the missionaries understand his doubts.
Explanation:
The excerpt we are analyzing here was taken from the speech made by Red Jacket, a chief of the Wolf clan, in 1805. His purpose is to question the Christian missionaries' affirmation that there is only one religion to be followed and that Native-Americans' religion will keep them from entering Heaven when they die.
In this excerpt, Red Jacket asks the missionaries why they disagree so much about their own religion, why can't all Christians understand the Bible in the same way. He implies that, if the Bible and its teachings are supposed to be unquestionably right, then there should be no arguing between those who follow such teachings.
C
hope his helps
stay safe
brainliest is appreciated, only need. more to leave up:)))
Answer:
d). might not be able to help
Explanation:
Modal verbs are characterized as auxiliary verbs that aim to reflect the mood of the sentence. The different modal verbs show different moods like seeking or granting permission, advice, showing the probability of an event, ability, duty, etc.
In the given sentence, the correct modal verb to be used would be 'might' in order to neglect the 'possibility of him not helping her' irrespective of his wish whether he wants to do it or not. 'Might' is the modal auxiliary that is used to show the least possible actions or likelihood in past. <u>Since the sentence is framed in past, it stands for 'least possibility' which is further being refuted by use of 'not</u>.'
