This event received or name of massacre due to violence or conflict.
This confrontation was a prelude to what will later become a war for independence. Although it has limited relevance, it has an important symbolism.
In this event the soldiers were exalted and nervous, after the nonviolent attitude of a civilian the violence began, which shows that the tension was great.
<span>Yellowstone Caldera, United States of America</span>
Anne hutchinson's trial demonstrated that "church elders lacked tolerance."
Hutchinson's church trial started on March 15, 1638 at her home church in Boston. During this, the leaders of the church attempted to motivate her to apologize and admit her mistakes however to no avail,they read the charges against Hutchinson and endeavored to inspire her to concede they were blunders yet she stayed disobedient.
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
