Answer:
O violent and oppressive
Explanation:
authoritarian violent and oppressive a movement for the people geared toward social welfare.
Answer:
She wanted to give an educational opportunity to Quebec girls, indigenous and settler daughters by opening various schools and convents dedicated exclusively to the education of girls.
Explanation:
Marie Guyart was born into a family of bakers with deep Christian roots. At the age of 17 she married Claude Martin, a silk worker, with whom she had a son of the same name whom she would later profess in the Benedictines. She was a widow when she was very young but did not decide to remarry. She felt the call to religious vocation and tried to enter the Carmelites or the Feuillants, but it was not until 1631 that she was accepted in the monastery of the Ursulines of Tours, of the congregation of Bordeaux. There it took the name of Marie de l'Incarnation.
In this monastery he had contact with Jesuit missionaries assigned to Canada. He opened the first Ursuline monastery in Canada, in Quebec, for the care of a school for indigenous girls. Before the Ursulines there were only schools for boys in New France. The Ursulines established convents and schools for girls taught reading, writing, arithmetic and homemaking. It was expected that graduates would become nuns or wives or mothers.
Answer:
D: Major ideas that are shared in both works.
Explanation:
Positive : Payment of Poll tax was a prerequisite to the registration for voting in a number of states until 1965
Negatives: Poll tax affected poor Americans. After the right to vote was extended to all races (black people) a number of states enacted poll tax.. so basically they did that because they knew a lot of black people didn’t have money like that and didn’t want them to vote.
The case you describe is: SWEATT v. PAINTER
Details:
The case of <em>Sweatt v. Painter (</em>1950), challenged the "separate but equal" doctrine regarding racial segregated schooling which had been asserted by an earlier case, <em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em> (1896).
Heman Marion Sweatt was a black man who was not allowed admission into the School of Law of the University of Texas. Theophilus Painter was the president of the University of Texas at the time. So that's where the names in the lawsuit came from.
In the case, which made its way to the US Supreme Court, the ultimate decision was that forcing Mr. Sweatt to attend law school elsewhere or in a segregated program at the University of Texas failed to meet the "separate but equal" standard, because other options such as those would have lesser facilities, and he would be excluded from interaction with future lawyers who were attending the state university's main law school, available only to white students. The school experience would need to be truly equal in order for the "separate but equal" policy to be valid.
In 1954, another Supreme Court decision went even further. <em>Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka </em>extended civil liberties to all Americans in regard to access to all levels of education. The <em>Plessy v. Ferguson </em>case had said that separate, segregated public facilities were acceptable as long as the facilities offered were equal in quality. In <em>Brown v. Board of Education</em>, segregation was shown to create inequality, and the Supreme Court unanimously ruled segregation to be unconstitutional. After the Brown v. Board of Education decision, there was a struggle to get states to implement the new policy of desegregated schools, but eventually they were compelled to do so.
