He had constructed plans that were very sophisticated. He made many defenses and tactics to outsmart the British leading to their victory.
Answer:
<u>All other streaming services charge more per channel than Apex does.</u>
<u>Explanation:</u>
The best inference readers can make based on the claims in the advertisement is more likely to be that other streaming services charge more per channel than Apex does.
We can reach this conclusion because a typical advertisement would focus on the fact that <em>consumers often want value for their money, </em>and so they would be willing to patronize a streaming service that charges less per channel.
<u></u>
It is the establishment of national seashores
Normally, 9 to 5 jobs pay minimun wage, and are steady/common. Being a member of congress has high requirements to get to the level of being able to pass laws, bills, to veto the President's laws, and many more responisbilities. Having a 9 to 5 job means being a civilian with basic rights and knowledge. Working your way up to being a member of congress is highly prized, uncommon, and rarely attainable.
Hope this helps :) -Laura
Firstly, regarding it's history, it's important to understand two things that slightly confound popular narratives. You will often hear Christians stress that the motto is an integral part of our American history (wrongly citing it as an example of how we were founded as a Christian nation), and I think a great many don't realize that it was not actually legally enshrined as our national motto (or its varient added to our Pledge of Allegience) until 1956 and not put on all money until 1938. But, you will often hear atheists point THAT out, and I don't think <span>they </span><span>realize that the motto does, in fact, have a long and storied history in America, going back to at least the Star Spangled Banner, and wasn't just an an invention of Eisenhower Republicans to throw a middle finger at Communists. </span>
I only mention those two things because you'll hear both in other answers. The truth is that "In God We Trust" is both a longstanding and well worne component of American culture AND not one that dates continuously to its founding or which was viewed as fundamental until 80 years ago or whatever. Both are true.
But, to your question.
<span>The constitutionality of "In God We Trust" has been pretty well established in American jurisprudence. It is frequently challenged in court and to my knowledge thus far has never been found against in terms of constitutionality. </span>
<span>The reason is that it is generally considered to be purely ceremonial or ornamental, has no denomination attached to it, and is in no way coercive. </span>
The big precedent on the matter is from 1970, Aronow v. United States, in which the court found:
<span>"It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise. ...It is not easy to discern any religious significance attendant the payment of a bill with coin or currency on which has been imprinted 'In God We Trust' or the study of a government publication or document bearing that slogan. In fact, such secular uses of the motto was viewed as sacrilegious and irreverent by President Theodore Roosevelt. Yet Congress has directed such uses. While 'ceremonial' and 'patriotic' may not be particularly apt words to describe the category of the national motto, it is excluded from First Amendment significance because the motto has no theological or ritualistic impact. As stated by the Congressional report, it has 'spiritual and psychological value' and 'inspirational quality.</span>
