Regarding the source, we can comment on the following.
- Because you forgot to attach the article, we do not know the content of it. However, we gladly can comment on the following general terms.
- The source of información has to be valid, and you have to cite it in your article.
- The validation of your article depends on the proper primary and secondary sources you cite as part of your arguments.
- That is the reason why the sources for the article influence the content of the article.
- Good sources mean a solid argument and more interest on the part of your readers.
- Bad or questionable sources mean that your article won't have the credibility needed to be accepted.
We conclude that is very important for the writer to include reliable primary and secondary sources in his article to impact the audience.
Learn more about this topic here:
brainly.com/question/336747?referrer=searchResults
True because true true true true true true true true
There are basically two basic premises for defining progressive intellectuals: first, the modern government must be guided by" science "and not by politics itself; and, second, an industrialized economy must have close supervision and regulation. of the visible hand of the modern administrative state. Power must be concentrated in a bureaucracy of “anointed ones”, capable of leading the nation towards progress, based on science.
The legacy of" progressivism ", therefore, is that of a more and more leaderist, interventionist and bloated state, dominated by the" tyranny of specialists ", who have completely lost touch with the reality of the population.
Answer:
Explanation:
I tend to side with those who think civil liberties are extremely important; they are almost written in stone. They were put in the constitution to protect citizens from governments misusing their power. The government is so much more power than any one person and perhaps any one group. Moreover, they make the laws. The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) are meant to make sure citizens at least have the opportunity to exercise those rights.
However there are times when the rights go a little to far. Numerous times since 1968, introduced various proposals that attempted to protect the rights of the American Flag. On those occasions either congress or the Supreme Court protected the individual by saying burning the flag comes under the First Amendment -- freedom of expression.
My own opinion is that many people have died defending the flag. I don't know that free speech is more powerful than the right to burn a sacred symbol. I think there are limits to free speech.
The leaders of rhode island believed that religion would become corrupted.
