Answer:
The correct answer is: True.
Explanation:
<u>Moral imperatives can be understood as strong principles that lead a person through life to act in ways he/she considers morally right. </u>
<u>Moral imperatives are not utilitarian; this means that the person does not act in favor of the consequences that will result from acting in a particular way, but rather because acting in such a way, it's the right thing to do.</u>
<u>The concept of moral imperative was described by Immanuel Kant, and they were part of the broader concept of categorical imperatives.</u>
In conclusion, to the statement: <u>A moral imperative</u> prescribes an action, not for the sake of some result, but simply because that action is our moral duty, the correct answer is: True.
He ran a federal bank in Maryland.
Answer:
Benjamin Franklin
Explanation:
From May 25 to September 17, 1787, the Constitutional Convention presided in Pennsylvania. The creation of the Constitution of the United States took place during the convention. Benjamin Franklin was one of the delegates in the meet. He was the oldest one. He gave the speech on the last of the convent before the constitution was signed. and approved.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
I am going to take into consideration the 1st. Amendment to the United States Constitution.
It is true that the federal government must often balance protecting individual liberties and providing for order and security. We have seen how, at times, priority is given to one over the other, depending on the circumstances.
However, according to my thinking and belief systems, the federal government should always place more emphasis on protecting individual liberties. Just when the exceptional case is necessary, then the federal government must provide for order and security.
As stated in the 1st. Amendment, citizens must always have their freedom of speech and freely express what they believe is right; this includes reasonable critics of the economic and political systems, as well as to highlight positive attributes too.
Respecting the differences has always been a trademark for true democracies.
It is understandable that in times of conflict, as was the case of WWI and WWII, the government has put restrictions on certain liberties.
Some would say that the September 11 attacks justify the creation of the type of surveillance the government placed on the citizens, but that is when a fine line was crossed between protection and "espionage" without the consent of the citizens.
Answer: In August 1886, eight men labeled as anarchists were convicted in a sensational and controversial trial in which the jury was considered to be biased and no solid evidence was presented linking the defendants to the bombing. Hope it helps :)
Explanation:
