The Articles of Confederation was our first plan of government after the Revolutionary War. One success this plan of government had was in how it dealt with the organization and the sale of western lands. The Land Ordinance of 1785 was an excellent law that allowed for an orderly process to deal with lands in the West.
Evidence that the powers of leaders should be limited us given by<u> B. </u><u>citing incidences</u><u> of </u><u>violence </u><u>that arise when religious or government </u><u>leaders </u><u>go</u><u> too far</u><u> in </u><u>exerting power.</u>
You did not include the text in question but this should be the correct answer.
When power is unlimited:
- It can sometimes be abused it because leaders will not know where to stop
- Leaders might overexert their power such that it leads to violence as people rebel and they try to enforce their right to rule.
This is what happened in the American Revolution, the French Revolution and the partly in the Glorious Revolution (there was no violence here but it happened because the King wanted to overexert himself).
We can therefore conclude that power should be limited unless it could lead to violence as all powerful leaders go too far in exerting their authority.
<em>Find out more at brainly.com/question/18227348.</em>
Facts
Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in Dallas, Texas. Johnson burned the flag to protest the policies of President Ronald Reagan. He was arrested and charged with violating a Texas statute that prevented the desecration of a venerated object, including the American flag, if such action were likely to incite anger in others. A Texas court tried and convicted Johnson. He appealed, arguing that his actions were "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed to hear his case.
Issue
Whether flag burning constitutes "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.
Ruling
Yes.
Reasoning
(5-4)
The majority of the Court, according to Justice William Brennan, agreed with Johnson and held that flag burning constitutes a form of "symbolic speech" that is protected by the First Amendment. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech.
In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
Dissent
Justice Stevens
Writing for the dissent, Justice Stevens argued that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns, and thus, the government could lawfully prohibit flag burning.
I believe the answer is a or the first one.
they do now but Girls and black people did have them a long time ago! hope this helps :D
