Answer:
Some public safety services that the government provides:
- The army or the military: this is a public safety measure mainly intended to protect the citizens of a country against foreign threats and interventions. It provides this services in the air, the seas, and also in the land.
- The police: the police maintains the law and order inside the country. This is why you see many policemen in towns, but very few soldiers. They are also in charge of aiding in judicial investigation, and in assisting citizens with many of their needs.
- Firefighters: firefighters main function, as the name implies, is to put out fires. But they also act as a rescue force in case of natural disasters like floods or earthquakes, and they also provide support to people in need.
Answer:
upset emotions
Explanation:
In simple words, Listening and upsetting feelings have an opposite relationship. Significant negative feelings like rage, consciousness, or depression turn our energy inward, distracting it from the act of hearing, which needs complete concentration to be productive.
Thus, from the above we can conclude that the correct answer is upset emotions.
Answer:
John buys a toy plane from a toy store. The money he pays the store<u><em> is injected back into</em></u> the economy through <u><em>the employee's wage</em></u> and the taxes paid by the store.
Explanation:
If John buys a toy plane from a toy store, only John gets the benefit of using the toy. However, everyone benefits from the fact that he spent money. The money that he spent at the shop is injected back into the economy through the wages that are paid to the employee and the taxes that are paid by the store. Therefore, keeping money in circulation benefits everyone. In fact, one of the main problems of a crisis is that people do not spend money, which negatively affects the economy.
Answer:
For many centuries, natural law was recognized as a type of higher law that spelled out universal truths for the moral ordering of society based on a rational understanding of human nature. As a higher moral law, it gave citizens a standard for determining if the written laws and customs of their nation or any other nation were just or unjust, right or wrong, humane or inhumane. Today, natural law is not discussed very much, at least not explicitly. When mentioned at all, it is usually rejected as dangerous because it undermines existing laws or as intolerant because it is contrary to “multiculturalism,” which requires the non-judgmental acceptance of other cultures.
This negative view of natural law can be traced to Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), whose writings are largely devoted to showing the anarchy and civil wars caused by appeals to natural and divine laws above the will of the sovereign. Hobbes rejected traditional higher law doctrines and encouraged people to accept the established laws and customs of their nations, even if they seemed oppressive, for the sake of civil peace and security. His critique has been a leading cause of the demise of natural law and the acceptance of positive law as the only reliable guide for political authority.
One may be equally surprised to learn, however, that many people today embrace a different (and seemingly contradictory) view of natural law, and this too is traceable to Thomas Hobbes. For example, when conscientious people are confronted with violations of human rights—as in religious theocracies that violate women’s rights or in countries that allow sweatshops to trample on worker’s rights—they feel compelled to protest the injustice of those practices and to change them for the better. The protesters usually deny that they are following natural law, but they obviously are asserting a belief in universal moral truths that are grounded in human nature—in this case, the natural equality of human beings that underlies human rights. This understanding of higher law originates with Hobbes because he was largely responsible for transforming classical natural law into modern natural rights, thereby beginning the “human rights revolution” in thinking on natural law. How is it possible for Hobbes and his followers to embrace seemingly contradictory views of natural law, rejecting one form as intolerant, self-righteous, and anarchical, while embracing another form as the universal ideal of social justice? Let us turn to Hobbes for an answer to this puzzle, and, in so doing, uncover the sources of our modern conceptions of law, rights, and justice.
Answer:
exercising regularly, finding a purpose in life, having high self-esteem, and eating well
Explanation:
