The event that will cause tension between the competing values of individualism and rule of law is harsher criminal penalties for use of recreational drugs.
<h3>What is individualism & rule of law?</h3>
This means a theory that favors the freedom of action for individuals over collective control while the rule of law places every one below the power of law.
A tension will be cause between the competing values of individualism and rule of law when there is a harsher criminal penalties for use of recreational drugs.
Therefore, the Option D is correct.
Read more about individualism
<em>brainly.com/question/18405002</em>
#SPJ1
One such sentence would be this: "Great Britain now operates with a heavily limited monarchy, since it is Parliament, not the king or queen in power, that holds most of the power."
The choice that matches the Constitutional Amendment is Fifteenth Amendment: gave former slaves the right to vote.
<h3>What did the 15th Amendment do?</h3>
After the 13th Amendment freed enslaved people, the 14th Amendment made them citizens.
The South tried to take away the voting rights of the newly freed Americans so the 15th Amendment was passed to ensure that African Americans had the right to vote.
Find out more on the 15th Amendment at brainly.com/question/620540.
#SPJ1
Answer: The South was economic state was based in slavery and plantations while the North had factories which didn't require slaves. So the South feared greatly that they would plummet if they gave in to the Emancipation Proclamation.
Explanation:
1- The correct answer is A. Samuel Houston was the Texan leader who most supported the annexation to the United States. In fact, he was President of the Republic of Texas twice, and from his position he always fought for annexation, unlike others like Mirabeau Lamar. In addition, it is stated that Houston went to Texas sent by President Andrew Jackson to achieve annexation.
2- Houston argued that the annexation had to be carried out to respect the will and right of the Texan people (which were made up of American settlers) to decide the legal status of their territory. This argument is related to the right of self-determination of peoples, which I consider valid since it's theb population who has the power to decide on their future and that of the territory they inhabit and administer, not being the states able to make decisions contrary to the people and their will.
