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
Lera25 [3.4K]
3 years ago
15

Choose any of the bill of rights (amendment 1 -10 of the US constitution). Provide THREE (3) specific arguments IN FAVOR why thi

s Amendment is NECESSARY in a democratic society. And, provide TWO (2) arguments AGAINST why this Amendment MAY NO LONGER BE NECESSARY in today's America.
History
1 answer:
Serggg [28]3 years ago
6 0

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

I am going to choose the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The three specific arguments in favor of why this Amendment is necessary in a democratic society are the following.

1.- One of the most important characteristics of modern democratic societies is that citizens are free. Without freedom, there is no democracy.

2.- People have their own set of belief systems and they will always have them. It is intrinsic to human nature. No matter what religion people profess, it is their right.

3.- The right to assemble in a peaceful way to exchange ideas, no matter what kind of ideas, it's part of any democratic government and society in the world.

The two arguments against why this Amendment may no longer be necessary in today's America.

1.- It is so implicit that citizens have rights that will come a day in which this value of liberty would have no need to be part of a Bill of Rights.

2.- Science and the use of logic could be a substitute for the ingraining belief that people need religion to have something to believe in. When science could be able to explain it all through the use of reason, maybe there won't be the necessity to include freedom of religion as part of the Bill of Rights.

You might be interested in
What was the significance of Hammurabi’s code?(Ancient Civilizations)
Lemur [1.5K]

Answer:Known today as the Code of Hammurabi, the 282 laws are one of the earliest and more complete written legal codes from ancient times. The codes have served as a model for establishing justice in other cultures and are believed to have influenced laws established by Hebrew scribes, including those in the Book of Exodu

Explanation:

since i helped can i have brainlst please that would be greatly apericated

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What was expected of the colonists through the new Quartering Act passed in 1774 as part of the Coercive Acts (Intolerable Acts)
trapecia [35]
Colonists were expected to house British troops and treat them as honored guests.
8 0
3 years ago
Which of these INCORRECTLY describes the Federalist and Anti-Federalist views on government ?
Afina-wow [57]

Answer:

The question is incomplete without options. These were the views of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist.

The Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay created a government based on federalism to limit the power of the National Government to limit the possibility of governmental abuses of power. Anti-federalists represented Thomas Jefferson were mainly concerned with the rights of individuals and states.

The Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay intended to support the ratification of the United States Constitution.

After the Constitution was written, it needed to be ratified by 9 states, those who supported it were the Federalists while those against it were Anti-Federalists and proposed Articles of Confederation. At the conventions in 1789, arguments were canvassed by both different parties.

The Federalists felt the new Constitution was sufficient and therefore did not want a bill of rights.  They defended the weakness contained in the Constitution and stated that amendments will be effected if necessary.

The anti-federalists wanted a bill of rights.

The Argument canvassed at the ratification debates by anti-federalists to justify their position was that their position represents the protection of individual liberties, limits must be placed on the power of the federal government.

6 0
3 years ago
Who was ruler of the Ottomans when
Ronch [10]
D Mehmed II was the sultan of the Ottoman Empire at the time
8 0
2 years ago
Was the u.s government justified in claiming ownership over Indian lands
FromTheMoon [43]

Answer:

no

Explanation

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • The areas where China agreed to give European nations exclusive trading rights:
    15·1 answer
  • What were the main functions of a guild? A. to protect the interests of people working in an industry and maintain standards wit
    8·2 answers
  • Why did the Crown pass the so-called Intolerable Acts?
    9·2 answers
  • What changes resulted from the development of systematic agriculture?
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following characters served as the antagonist in "The Cold Equations"?
    13·1 answer
  • Who was the Washington lawyer who watched the bombardment of Fort McHenry from a British ship and wrote a poem about it? A.Franc
    8·1 answer
  • Why do you think the Muslim world was a center of trade?
    12·1 answer
  • Explain how the state of New York on the East Coast of the United States and Texas in the south are different
    7·2 answers
  • The British army responded to the colonial victory at Trenton by recapturing the town. attacking Princeton. capturing Fort Lee.
    10·2 answers
  • What is the joining of a territory with another country
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!