In general terms, most human beings are committed to obeying the law. However, to give a well-founded answer it's important to take into consideration the concepts of <em>ethics </em>and <em>morality</em> and also the cultures involved in this matter. Having said that, in the dilemma of a person being forced to choose between breaking the law to help a friend or not breaking the law but disappointing a friend, the results I would expect are the following:
The Hindu population (adults and children), based on the complex and inherent concept of <em>Dharma, </em>which assigns a high value to right conduct, ethics and morality, would tend to prioritise the obedience to law while the group of Americans would probably hesitate in this forced decision. Some psychology specialists talk about a moral crisis in America in which the limits of moral conviction, virtues and vices, good and evil, right and wrong are not very clear. If this applies to a vast part of American society, they would not be expected to choose law obedience in first place.
Answer:
rusader military victory, resulting in a three-year truce. Recognition of the territorial status quo at the end of active campaigning, including continued Muslim control of Jerusalem and the restoration of the Levantine Crusader States.
Over population and decrease of the population as well
Answer: True
Explanation: Being a 'good winner' is marked by being a humble player. Not only being modest to your teammates, but also being complimentary to the opponents. The characteristics of being a 'good winner' includes:
- Accepting compliments from the opposing team.
- Accept and learn from the mistakes that your team, even yourself, have made.
- Trying hard to better yourself, and motivate your team to try harder in the future.
