Answer:
okay so I don't believe in the whole pro choice but but my mom does and I have a idea of what she would say. Once again I don't believe in pro choice, its the womans body and they should do as they please with their body so don't come after me :)
If a woman has the right to choose to either keep the baby or to get rid of it. Then the woman should keep the baby because it's her responsibility. She chose to get pregnant now she must take care of it because it's like abandoning it.
or or
Incase of a survivor of you know. I know it's so frustrating but my mother has said this and it's have her keep the baby because it's not the baby's fault and the person should have been more careful. cause the kid didn't ask to born or created. (when she said this we got in such a big argument)
anyways I hope this is some help
If you were to say that everyone had, "Equal protection under the law", that would mean that everyone deserves the same type of treatment, rights, and obviously protection. I hope this helps. Can you please mark as the brainliest, if I've helped? Thank you very much.
The ideas of philosophers who were active during the Enlightenment period were that (2) faith in human reason was something they were ready to acknowledge.
This period itself was devoting a lot of thought and time into the idea of human rationalism, human advancement, science, and technology (all of these in their limited form at their time, as we're talking a few centuries in the past).
The philosophers that are considered to be from this period were Benjamin Franklin, Descartes, Diderot, etc.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Unfortunately, you forgot to include the options for this question,
However, trying to help you, we can answer based on our knowledge of this topic.
The Supreme Court ruled in Miranda v. Arizona that people "that are under arrest must be read their rights by law enforcement."
We are talking about the Supreme Court case in which the Warren Court dealt with the rights of the accused: Miranda v. Arizona.
Miranda v. Arizona was a case decided by the Warren court on June 13, 1966. Ernesto Miranda had a written confession for kidnap and r*pe, but the issue was that police interrogated him without the presence of a lawyer, neither the police officers told him he had the right to call a lawyer.
The Court's decision favored Miranda, overturned his conviction and the case was sent to Arizona for retrial.
