Answer:
Akbar was secular and Aurangzeb was not secular
Explanation:
Akbar was secular and he allowed people of all religion to practice their religious rituals without any fear in his reign. This was evident from the Akbar decision to allow his Hindu wife Jodha to continue being Hindu.
While on the other hand Aurangzeb was not secular and he forcefully converted people of other religion to adopt Islam forcefully
Answer:
wheres the picture ?
Explanation:
if you upload the picture we can help.
This is what you personally think. Either way people would be upset. If you cut programs, those who benefited from them would be mad, whereas an increase in taxes will also upset everyone, because no one really likes taxes.<span />
The right to bear arms is not the whole thing. In fact if you read it it is quite self explanatory. The second amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." So the right to bear arms is so we can have a well organized militia.
Is this a question? Can you rephrase it?
