1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
LenKa [72]
3 years ago
14

Heeeeeeeeelp me ples

History
1 answer:
nadezda [96]3 years ago
7 0
1. Friends can easily be turned against each other due to political opinion because instead of looking at it and trying to understand each other’s perspectives, they may get caught up in who’s right and who’s wrong and arguments like this can end a friendship.

2. it is important to understand people who think different then you because they may be looking at it from a perspective you have never looked at it from before and you may gain information from their perspective that can change your point of view, or make your opinion even stronger.

I hope this helped :)
You might be interested in
Which of the following describes how the end of apartheid affected South Africa’s political system?
stellarik [79]

Answer:

b

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
According to the chart, Demarco and Tanya will pay a
Fittoniya [83]

Answer:

Here's the correct answers since "idk" is not the right answers:

Part A: $195,104

Part B: $365,104

Part C: higher

Explanation: it tells me the correct answers on edge

4 0
3 years ago
When the police arrest someone today, they must follow certain agreed-upon procedures. They are said to be following
never [62]
The answer may be Protocols
6 0
3 years ago
Which scientist or scholar studies relics and artifacts left by earlier human cultures? A. cartographer B. historian C. anthropo
natima [27]
An archaeologist is a <span>scientist or scholar studies relics and artifacts left by earlier human cultures.</span>
4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
3 Points
REY [17]

Answer:

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court held that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, regardless of whether they were enslaved or free, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them.[2][3] The decision was made in the case of Dred Scott, an enslaved black man whose owners had taken him from Missouri, which was a slave-holding state, into the Missouri Territory, most of which had been designated "free" territory by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. When his owners later brought him back to Missouri, Scott sued in court for his freedom, claiming that because he had been taken into "free" U.S. territory, he had automatically been freed, and was legally no longer a slave. Scott sued first in Missouri state court, which ruled that he was still a slave under its law. He then sued in U.S. federal court, which ruled against him by deciding that it had to apply Missouri law to the case. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • One result of the Treaty of Paris was that
    7·1 answer
  • WILL AWARD BRAINLEST!!!!
    12·2 answers
  • How did the soviet development of atomic weapons affect the containment strategy
    5·1 answer
  • How does larger mass affect your weight
    12·1 answer
  • Free points! Post anything you want :) Stay safe!​
    9·2 answers
  • How did U.S. participation in World War I further establish it as a world power?
    12·1 answer
  • What is the breakdown of the ethnicity of voting members of the 115th Congress
    9·1 answer
  • What was the purpose of the Stamp Act of 1765?
    6·2 answers
  • PLS HELP ME ANSWER THIS !!!
    7·1 answer
  • Can you help me with 20 plz it is not a good picture but plz help
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!