Answer:
u should turn it into the atm place.
One should avoid bad deeds because it is ethically and morally wrong. In a religious perspective it is wrong, for example, to put on a blood transfusion. Based on the article (Accept or Refuse Blood Transfusion) states: Professor Gerhard von Rad has pointed out that Genesis 9:3, 4 “is not an isolated ‘dietary law’ at all . . . but an ordinance for all mankind.” (Genesis—A Commentary, 1961) Remember, too, that in Genesis 9:3-6 the prohibition on blood was linked with God’s statement about man’s having even higher regard for the life of other humans. Rabbi Benno Jacob observed:
“The two prohibitions belong together. . . . The permission to eat meat, but without its blood, and the prohibition against shedding human blood indicate the place of man within the world of the living . . . In summary: the reason for the prohibition of blood is of a moral character. . . . Later Judaism regarded this passage as establishing fundamental ethics for every human being.”
And, In society, it is wrong for a minor to be with a person who is older than themselves, steal, or cheat on a spouse. We avoid bad deeds in order to have a clean conscious, to oblige with society rules, to be ok with others, to not disobey the norms of a law, etc. In conclusion, there are many reason to avoid bad deeds. Be it personal, because of society or religious.
Answer: in our country, any proposal to amend the Constitution is idle because it’s effectively impossible….The Founders made the amendment process difficult because they wanted to lock in the political deals that made ratification of the Constitution possible. Moreover, they recognized that, for a government to function well, the ground rules should be stable. But they also understood that the people will need to change those ground rules as new challenges and problems surface with the passage of time….But the Founders blundered. They made passing an amendment too hard….In setting the bar so high, the Framers didn’t foresee that as the country became more populous and diverse, it would become harder for people to reach the near-consensus required for change.”
