Explanation:
John Locke considers the state of nature in his Second Treatise on Civil Government written around the time of the Exclusion Crisis in England during the 1680s. For Locke, in the state of nature all men are free "to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature." "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it", and that law is reason. Locke believes that reason teaches that "no one ought to harm another in his life, liberty, and or property" and that transgressions of this may be punished. Locke describes the state of nature and civil society to be opposites of each other, and the need for civil society comes in part from the perpetual existence of the state of nature. This view of the state of nature is partly deduced from Christian belief (unlike Hobbes, whose philosophy is not dependent upon any prior theology).
Choosing between spending money on a new suit or a vacation is an example of <u>Social Security</u>.
No matter how much or how little you spend, purchasing a suit is a significant investment because it will be among your most valuable possessions. A decent suit allows you access. It offers chances that would not be available otherwise.
Social security is the safety net that a society offers to individuals and families to ensure that they have access to health care and to assure financial stability, particularly in circumstances of old age, unemployment, illness, invalidity, work injuries, maternity, or the death of a primary earner.
Learn more about suit here
brainly.com/question/22810654
#SPJ4
It is important to never confuse a tornado with a hurricane or other tropical cyclone because tornadoes and hurricanes are very different phenomena. Perhaps the only similarity between tornadoes and hurricanes is that they both contain strong rotating winds that can cause damage.
1. This is a matter of constitutional law, as the reporter is defending her rights as a citizen stated by the Constitution (in this case, her freedom of expression).
2. It is a combination. On the one hand, the case will involve studying the constitution, and what it has to say about the reporter's freedoms. On the other hand, it will require studying the statute that argues that news agencies cannot publish information that can threaten the nation. Finally, case law will likely be relevant if there is a similar precedent in the law.
3. The law that the federal government is presenting is intended to protect the citizen's from threatening information. On the other hand, the law that the reporter is referring to is intended to protect her freedom of expression.
4. If the law to protect citizen's from information did not exist, it could be an obstacle for the effective action of the government. It could also cause panic and animosity among the people. If the law the reporter is defending did not exist, the government would be able to control the press completely.
