The authors of this editorial is against women’s rights to vote. According to the text, the author stated that “Without the counsel and guidance of men, no woman ever ruled a state wisely or well.” This suggests that the author did not think that women can be smart on these topics. The author also stated, “A characteristic they were born with.” “That they lack the genius of politics.” You can tell that the authors strongly believe that women do not have the skill and genius that men do and that they were born with it and it isn't “curable.” (as they said.) In the first paragraph, they also stated that women suffrage would result horribly for the government and weaken it, as well as for society. Throughout the short article, the beliefs the authors had can be summarized as women not being smart enough, unlike men, and the women suffrage is ridiculous and unnecessary.( please mark as brainliest and 5 stars I really tried!)
The lack of response does not tell us about British values especially when profit is involved because the British values guides the citizen behaviors.
<h3>What are British values?</h3>
The British values mean a sense of national identity which are shared and forms the culture and traditions of the British people
Some of British values is Mutual respect when two people may not agree on everything but they don't get upset etc
In conclusion, the lack of response does not tell us about British values especially when profit is involved because the British values guides the citizen behaviors.
Read more about British values
<em>brainly.com/question/1009894</em>
approved on September 25, 1789 and signed on December 15, 1791
On September 25, 1789, Congress transmitted to the state Legislatures twelve proposed amendments to the Constitution. Numbers three through twelve were adopted by the states to become the United States (U.S.) Bill of Rights, effective December 15, 1791. James Madison proposed the U.S. Bill of Rights.
Answer:
Among the several Enlightenment-era influential philosophers, I believe that <u>John Locke</u> is the one who better understood politics, and has the best conception of man's natural state. Plus, he was influential in the US political thought during the Revolution Era.
Explanation:
<u>John Locke theorized that the man, once living in the natural state, it's free, but he doesn't feel himself safe. Then, the man makes a contract with a superior authority - the State - to promote him the necessary goods. However, this contract address that the State shouldn't interfere on the man's business. It's only duty was to promote social development. Once the government didn't follow the contract, man could take off the governor and elect another one. This principle was crucial in the development of the US political thought. </u>If we compare Locke with Jean-Jacques Rousseau, for instance, we can see that Locke has a better conception about politics, and in several ways, Locke's view is more realistic. Rousseau had a romanticized point of view about society, and according to him, humans are strictly good, and they enjoy to live in the community.
Answer:
oooooooooooooooooo pretty
