Answer:the territoriality principle.
Explanation: The territoriality principle holds that a state has jurisdiction over all acts, whether criminal or not, committed on its territory and over everyone located on the territory of that state.
Answer:
d. Andy, because he is the less elastic factor
Explanation:
Hi,
Israel uses a Parliamentary Democracy
Answer:
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment
Explanation:
The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was a social research that sought to find out the natural history of syphilis, with the purpose of justifying treatment programs for blacks.
Termed as “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male.” It started in 1932, and lasted till 1972, when it was discovered that the reasearch was conducted without the benefit of patients’ informed consent.
Following a governmental review of the study, it was concluded that, the subjects involved in the research had been misled and had not been given all the facts required to provide informed consent, hence, the study was considered to be "ETHICALLY UNJUSTIFIED" that is, the knowledge acquired was minute when compared with the risks the study posed for its subjects.
Therefore, The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was an example of a major ethical mistake in the history of social research.
Answer: Social markers of difference.
Explanation: The social markers of diffence are a field study of social cience, with the goal of explain how the inequalities and hierarchies of all people are developed by the human history. The groups of people who are discriminated or disadvantage by the course of time are the focus in this social area.
Social markers of difference, beyond a study, is a form to help discriminated or disadvantage people know your own story and, even more, recognize yourselves as a important piece of the society puzzle, and to claim your rights in the right and effective ways.
Studies such as these make it possible to see more directly how worked theories are extended to society in the form of fostering public policies.
Many of the recent reflections on the production of difference and analysis of social inequality have been putting forth the articulation between the so called "social markers of difference". In this broad field - that involves debates on differential rights, acknowledgement policies, the production of new sensibilities, and at the same time the reformulation of past forms of exclusion - the intersection between race, nation, sexuality and gender is high lightened.