Slavery tolerated because of "necessity" means that you do not really want to do it, but you think you must do it. An example is when you have a farm and you need people to work on it. The trouble behind this scenario is that your farm isn’t making money to pay your farm helpers their proper wages, so you resort to slavery. In this case, you do not need money for salaries because your farm is doing well to keep your slaves clothed and fed.
Slavery affirmed as a "moral right" is when you think it is your right to be the master and the slaves deserves to be slaves.
<span>C) the invasion of Poland
It happened in 1939, before all of the other events.
Hope this helps :)</span>
It is C. The Secretary of State William Seward argued that the U.S. should buy Alaska because U.S. wants expand, and Alaska had valuable resources.
Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, while taking too much power away from state and local governments. Many felt that the federal government would be too far removed to represent the average citizen. Anti-Federalists feared the nation was too large for the national government to respond to the concerns of people on a state and local basis. The Anti-Federalists were also worried that the original text of the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights. They wanted guaranteed protection for certain basic liberties, such as freedom of speech and trial by jury. A Bill of Rights was added in 1791. In part to gain the support of the Anti-Federalists, the Federalists promised to add a bill of rights if the Anti-Federalists would vote for the Constitution
Federalists believed that the nation might not survive without the passage of the Constitution, and that a stronger national government was necessary after the failed Articles of Confederation. The Federalists met Anti-Federalist arguments that the new government created by the Constitution was too powerful by explaining that the document had many built-in safeguards, such as:
- Limited Government: Federalists argued that the national government only had the powers specifically granted to it under the Constitution, and was prohibited from doing some things at all.
- Separation of Powers: Federalists argued that, by separating the basic powers of government into three equal branches and not giving too much power to any one person or group, the Constitution provided balance and prevented the potential for tyranny.
- Checks and Balances: Federalists argued that the Constitution provided a system of checks and balances, where each of the three branches is able to check or limit the other branches.
