Too plain a vauge. You need more information.
- 06/12/2006
- 20:35:40
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
People vote for people that promise them the best things that they never fulfill. Why? Because they will not be there forever. What elected officials say and what they do is a completely different story. With every election you see the same thing with the same result. When will citizens of these countries begin to realize that?
- 10/07/2005
- 20:46:47
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
They even moniter pay phones now. I used a payphone recently and it had a sticker on it saying that under the patriot act all calls will be monitered. Interesting, what if I was talking to my attorney. They called it the patriot act so that anyone that did not vote for it would be deemed "unpatriotic" interesting how things work is it not?
- 09/12/2004
- 22:55:24
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
Anything about her Majesty that is good, is good
- 09/12/2004
- 22:52:47
- Score: 5 out of 6 people found this comment useful.
in re: Consent may not be given if the person is under the age of 17.You need to do more research because this statement is faulty. In Washington State the age of consent is 16.
- 09/12/2004
- 22:41:11
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
In re: If she declines and he still continues to have sex with her, then he is committing a crime.You should give a description of "what crime" he is commiting. As for Washington state based soley upon what is written in your essay, the crime would be:RCW 9A.44.060Rape in the third degree.(1) A person is guilty of rape in the third degree when, under circumstances not constituting rape in the first or second degrees, such person engages in sexual intercourse with another person, not married to the perpetrator:(a) Where the victim did not consent as defined in RCW 9A.44.010(7), to sexual intercourse with the perpetrator and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct, or(b) Where there is threat of substantial unlawful harm to property rights of the victim.(2) Rape in the third degree is a class C felony.
- 03/12/2004
- 11:39:45
- Score: 3 out of 4 people found this comment useful.
Democratic - Not a form of governmentauthoritarian - Not a form of governmentWell, it appears they are \"systems of ruling\" and not \"forms of government.\"What is a form of government:1.) Federal Republic2.) Republic3.) Monarchy4.) Constitutional Monarchy5.) Communist7.) Dictatorshipect, ect, ectLets us look closer:Executive branches of government:1.) A President2.) A Prime Minister3.) A King or Queen4.) An Emporer or Empress5.) A sheik or Shah6.) For 3,4, and five simply a \"Monarch.\"Please, realistically, do tell [FACTUAL WISE] how a comparative Constitutional Monarchy, where the MONARCH has executive authority, is not as good a FEDERAL REPUBLIC LIKE THAT OF THE UNITED STATES?\"Election\" is simply an ignorant cop-out.*waits for answer*
- 01/12/2004
- 02:41:34
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
People now believe in their own "Divine Right" rather than the one of kings God granted to David and his descendants for all time (regardless of their character mind you). The pedophile crisis has brought matters to a head as lay people begin to ask why they are not "boss" of the Church and why they must submit to the judgement of a man in Rome who they did not elect. Since Vatican II it has become increasingly hard for the Church to respond with a simple, "because I said so". People have seen many Catholics attack monarchy and defend republicanism in secular matters and have reasoned, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander" and demanded their Church to become more democratic as well.David sets a good example for us in this case with his troubles with King Saul. Saul was trying to kill David, an entirely innocent man. Yet, when David had the chance to kill Saul, though he had every justification to destroy the man who was trying to destroy him, and though his friends begged him to do so, David did not. He bowed down before Saul and pledged himself to be his loyal servant. Why? Because Saul was his King, he was anointed by God and only God had authority to punish him. How many of us could have done the same? David was not concerned with Saul's actions, that was for God to decide, and by so doing he demonstrated his own holiness and superior virtue which even Saul had to recognize. This is similar to what King Charles I of Britain said about a subject and a sovereign being clean, seperate things, and that government had nothing to do with the people, but was a matter between the monarch on earth and the monarch in Heaven.For hundreds of years the issue was not so complicated. The Holy Roman Empire was the temporal manifestation of Christian authority on earth. When it was destroyed at the hands of France\'s revolutionary, self-crowned "emperor" things got worse. However, there was still the Papal States, and a clear understanding that the Pope, and Christ who he served as vicar, had both spiritual and temporal authority as monarch. This ended with the unification of Italy. Still, the Church held firm though. When Pope Pius XI instituted the Feast of Christ the King it was a clear call to return to the temporal and spiritual monarchy of Christendom, which recognized Christ as King over all Creation. However, the republicanism continues to creep in, and since it has managed to get a foothold in the Church, our task has become that much more difficult.
- 01/12/2004
- 01:59:00
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
Catholics once prided themselves on their fidelity and devotion to monarchy, both temporal in their country, and spiritual through God and the Papacy. The Church crowned kings and emperors in sacred ceremonies just as King Saul, King David, King Solomon and their descendants were anointed by holy men to finalize their role as God\'s lieutenant in care of a nation. God called King David a man after His own heart and said that King Solomon would be called His son and that He would be called His father.The problem today is that democracy has become God to many people around the world. When Catholics began abandoning monarchy for the seeming success of the democratic republic they knowingly or ignorantly embraced the ideology of the Puritans of Oliver Cromwell: that the voice of the people is the voice of God. Clearly this is not so! God warned us that the majority will follow the easy path to destruction and only a few will take the narrow path of goodness. Ultimately, things got so bad that even the Church stopped crowning new Popes begining with John Paul I. Liberal ideas the Church would have once shunned are now being embraced, and Rome is going to have to pay the price.
- 01/12/2004
- 01:56:48
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
The Bible is riddled with repetitions and contradictions.Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.Jesus' last words:Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."God be seen?Exod. 24:9,10; Amos 9:1; Gen. 26:2; and John 14:9God CAN be seen:"And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (Ex. 33:23)"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (Ex. 33:11)"For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (Gen. 32:30)God CANNOT be seen:"No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18)"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (Ex. 33:20)"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1 Tim. 6:16)http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html#good_to_all
- 01/12/2004
- 01:37:13
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
In re: "Basically, everyone had their own opinion and vehemently felt that they were correct."And you wonder how congress can agree on anything....
- 01/12/2004
- 01:13:29
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
This is not a 2nd year college essay. This looks like a high school paper, maybe 9th grade or so.
- 29/11/2004
- 00:41:06
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
Maybe you should try to actually "Write your own paper." This is nothing more than a bunch of quotes and paraphrases from other peoples research. Try using your own intellect. One citation per page.
- 28/11/2004
- 03:10:22
- Score: 1 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
Democracy:1.) Brings Greed2.) Breeds Violence3.) Increases Corruption4.) Majority rule is not always right5.) Is not "divinely" inspired government. (Unless God was elected).6.) Gets relatively nothing accomplished in the short term and significantly nothing in the long term.7.) Breeds scandals8.) Are more warlike and go to war more often.9.)Are materialistic.10.) Embrace humanism instead of religion.11.) Have more laws than non-democracies.12.) Turn into police states.13.) Presidents do virtually nothing they say they were going to do because they can never be president again.14.) Presidents decisions are based on "popularity points."15.) Do not accomplish their main goals very often.16.) Politicians are usually "self-interested."17.) cannot agree on important issues very often.18.) Also have someone else to blame for their mistakes.19.) Always have to have a "Mortal Enemy."20.) Owe allegiance to intersts groups.21.) Usually do not do what is "good for the country."THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:1.) Most violent country on the planet.2.) Has more criminals behind bars than any other country on earth.3.) Is the 17th most corrupt country on the planet.4.) Has more stagatory laws than any other country on Earth.5.) Has a "New Scandal" with each President.6.) Has superiority complex.7.) Has biggest margin between the rich and the poor.8.) Is extremely "Materialistic."9.) FORCES democracy on less powerful countries even though it is a FEDERAL REPUBLIC.Ect ect ect ect ect
- 28/11/2004
- 03:05:05
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
God created the Earth and the Heaven in six days. If God is a Deity, why question whether or not he could indeed create in six days? Was there scientist there to observe it? The bible is not fallable, the interpitations are. What you get and understand from one chapeter others will get something completely different from even though to you it is quite obvious.One thing is certain, God is a Monarch (A King). His realm is refered to as a Kingdom (Not a Republic). I advise you to start support divinely inspired government (Monarchies) instead of manly inspired government (Republics). Monarchs have a divine right to rule through coronations done by the church in accordance with gods will. The church is supposed to keep the monarch in check and abide by gods will. If not, that is was parliment is for.
- 28/11/2004
- 02:48:54
- Score: 0 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
That is funny that two people did not like what I had to say. THey must be the ones that "Elected" god through the democratic process that was initially started by an ancient "KING." The Majority is NOT always right.
- 28/11/2004
- 02:34:26
- Score: 2 out of 4 people found this comment useful.
You want a Federal Republic with Democratic tradition so deal with it. THe Jury system is in the Constitution so unless congress wishes to ammend the constitution to remove juries, deal with it.
- 25/11/2004
- 03:34:21
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
Martial law is defined as: military rule or authority imposed on a civilian population when the civil authorities cannot maintain law and order, as in a time of war or during an emergency.So to anser your question, civil liberties "ARE" suspended during war time. Because if the United States was invaded. Martial Law would be declared immediately.
- 22/11/2004
- 01:53:13
- Score: 0 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
Nice to see some people have the correct thinking pattern. Drug users have no one else to blame but themselves for their failed lives. No one "forced" them to start using narcotics.
- 06/04/2004
- 12:36:20
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
Rape of a child = DeathChild Molestation = DeathChild Pornography = DeathSexual Exploitation of a Child = DeathSince we live in a "Federal Republic" that has a written constitution this would be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment for the severity of the punishment on the crime. Makes you cry out for a Ruling Monarch doesnt it?
- 02/04/2004
- 12:51:24
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
I guess going to prison will eventually lose its effect or the death penalty will lose its effect so maybe we should do away with all forms of punishment. The government has no right to infringe on how a parent raises a child. Would it better suit you if the government implimented a BOOK on how to raise your child and if you did not follow this book you went to prison? WELCOME to COMMUNISM
- 02/04/2004
- 12:44:16
- Score: 1 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
One cannot argue with human nature. An average normal thinking individual has a tendancy to want to "protect" a woman. This is self evident all throughout history and if you do not see it maybe you need some real history classes. I will give you some very basic examples of a Mans tendancy to want to portect a woman. Answer the following questions:1.) When walking down the street on a sidewalk holding hands with your girlfriend or boyfriend which one of you is closest to the road?2.) When sleeping in the bedroom who usually sleeps closest to the door?3.) If you are a man and see a girl crying what do you do?4.) Who are you more likely to run outside to help when you hear a cry for help, A mans voice or a womans voice?5.) When there is an accident involving both men and women who is generally rescued first?6.) During hostage situations who is always released first if both men and women are there?Ponder ont hat for awhile....
- 02/04/2004
- 12:39:19
- Score: 2 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
What I am getting from this essay is that personality should be an attribute to beauty. This is flawed thinking my lady because that is just not the way it is. Different people tend to like different kinds of girls whether they are supermodel types or larger girls. The commercials or magazines do not command teenagers to become anorexic, teenagers make those decisions on their own. You must put blame where blame is due. Do matches cause arson my lady? Or do the people that "use" the matches cause arson? Beauty, I am afraid, is in the eye of the beholder. People differ on what they view beauty. A good pesonality is a good "Trait" but it is not beautiful. If a Beautiful woman has an horrendous attitude, that does not change the fact that she is beautiful nor does it make her any less beautiful. Beauty is measured by physical appeal. I am sure you cannot get together with someone you find repuslive physcially simply because they have a good attitude. That is just a self enduced dillusion.
- 02/04/2004
- 12:19:56
- Score: 1 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
What does it mean today in society to be a woman? Can we really call American girls "ladies?" What is the difference between being a "Lady" and being a woman? Applied to men, it is asking, What is the difference between being a "Gentleman" and just being a Man? In my entire life I have had the chance to call only a small group of girls "Ladies." Let me make it clear that in order to be a "Lady" one does not have to be wealthy. Now ponder on that with an open mind....
- 02/04/2004
- 12:09:33
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
You cite "Way" too many sources in your paper You should limit citation to about one per page. Your paper gets "Confusing" as well as I do not know what you are really trying to say.
- 01/04/2004
- 23:55:28
- Score: 5 out of 5 people found this comment useful.
Lets look at this....What IF the United States had laws like:Possession of any illegal narcotic, upon conviction, was executed within two weeks. How many people would actually violate those laws after a few thousand people were executed?
- 24/02/2004
- 03:56:30
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
Lets change the roles here for a momment. let the United States=Iraqlet China=the United StatesWhat would we have said and/or done?
- 24/02/2004
- 03:35:32
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
This essay is....superb.
- 24/02/2004
- 02:29:16
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
Is it humane to execute and make a rapist of children suffer an extreme death? Damn right it is. what about the person that raped and killed someones mother or sister? Should they have the benifit of a "humane" death when their crimes were so heinous the families have to be removed fromt he courtrooms while the attorneys present photographic evidence? Any human being that intentionally murders or rapes any other human being needs to die with extreme prejudice in a manner similar to what they inflicted. Oh the poor murderer lets save the murderer.
- 19/02/2004
- 03:46:01
- Score: 0 out of 0 people found this comment useful.
So, let me guess you do not drive a car, use paper or any other chemicals to clean or wash your clothes; you do not use electricity, since some of it comes from polluting factories and power plants. Now if you do not do any of that then and only then do you have room to complain about smoking and its effects. People complain about smoking then drive off in their cars like it is nothing. How much carbon monoxide you think poors out of a cars exhaust? Ever read up on it? then multiply that by a few hundred thousand cars your in contact with even while you sleep in your house or apartment; powered by coal power plants that are the most "polluting" extrators of power on the planet and sleep in those clean clothes cleaned by "chemicals" put into the detergent and/or water since Dihydrogen Monoxide (water) has other chemicals such as 1.) ammonia, chorline, nitrates ect placed into the water that you drink into your body. If your going to complain about something complain about something worthwhile to complain about instead of complaining about smokers in a freakin tavern. Get a life
- 19/02/2004
- 03:32:44
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
It is human nature to define things or people and put them into "classes." The animal Kingdom, felines, Canines, Primates. Politicians, Governers, Crack-heads, rappers, ect. Are you some special person that has not been "classified" to some extent? If it wasnt for Monarchy we wouldnt exist now. How do you think the United States was started?
- 28/01/2004
- 23:16:02
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
The Ideal President would be a Monarch. Get rid of the Presidency an institude a Monarchy. A constitutional Monarchy of course.
- 27/01/2004
- 20:23:08
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
Democracy has been around since 438 BCE. WHy not mention what happened to these places? WHy bash and bash Monarchy? Being anti Monarchy is being anti-God. God is a Monarch. His system of government has been Monarchy since time began. The perfect form of government is a Constitutional Monarchy plain and simple since Democracy came through a Monarchy you cannot argue with that either.
- 27/01/2004
- 20:20:42
- Score: 1 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
The defintion for the form of government of the United States of AMerica is:FEDERAL REPUBLIC with strong democractic TRADITION. A "real" Democracy is what? "Rule by the people." Can you honestly say that we the people vote on every single piece of legislative material that is passed into law? Do we vote on what should or should not be a Law? Oh that is right we "elect" people to do just that for us correct? Remember Hitler was elected through Democracy. Hence just and fari elections.
- 27/01/2004
- 20:16:17
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
If your a Christian and loyal to your god then your really a Monarchist not a democrat. Sorry to have to be the one to inform you of this. Is it not the "Kingdom of Heaven" is God not refered to as "King of Kings?" Since the beginning of time itself God's system of Rule has been Monarchy.
- 27/01/2004
- 20:10:33
- Score: 10 out of 13 people found this comment useful.
Does a matchbook give way for an arsonist? Does a gun create the vicious murderer?Influence is a powerful thing, but the "person" still makes the choice themselves, no one else makes that decision for them. They can blame it on whatever they wish to but violence in the media does not cause violence in people. For that matter their was a survey with the children that watched sesame street and concluded that they were more violent because of it. You let me know when you want to come home, turn on the tv and watch a flower bloom on every channel.
- 27/01/2004
- 20:02:09
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
Its simple, GOD said, "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." When a person takes another human beings life with malace, that person forfiets thier right to life. One murderer on Death Row cost the taxpayers $30,000 dollars a year. Even though they are in a prison they still get to "live." Every murder convicted in court by a grand jury should be executed with extreme prejudice immediately following conviction for they are not only a waste to society, they do not deserve the life they have been presented with and most surely do not deserve to live out their life whether it is in a prison or not. They murder, so it is the just and moral obligation of the State to take fromthe criminal exactly what he took from the victom, "life."
- 27/01/2004
- 19:56:00
- Score: 1 out of 1 people found this comment useful.
This is a good essay I hope you place more of them here.
- 24/10/2003
- 21:13:10
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
If someone is a violent criminal police should be able to beat them. Actually someone should just get a small fine for beating known dangerous criminals.
- 24/10/2003
- 20:43:33
- Score: 3 out of 4 people found this comment useful.
You give alot of allegations and points of view related to you. I have been to prison and it wasnt all hunky doory as you put it. But then again I was not on death row. I was classified "Medium" security. Yes we were allowed TV's (A small 13") which we had to "Pay" for and could not leave the pennitentury with. It was a "Privledge" for not causing "problems" and abiding by the "Rules." You see only the negative aspect of it in your own selfish perspective. It is simple, the more you keep criminals "entertained" the less likely they are to cause more "Problems." You really tick them off and people get hurt and murdered. If I had a Life sentance with no chance of parole and some guard ticked me off I could kill him and what are they going to do? Add more years onto an already life sentace which I was already never getting released and would die in prison anyway. Your way equals more death and corruption than there already is. The Prison system works if you want it to work and they reward you for showing that you "want" to change. Since then I have put myself through college and am a United States Marine. So dont give me this babble I have been on both sides and know how they work and why they do what they do.
- 24/10/2003
- 20:38:04
- Score: 5 out of 5 people found this comment useful.
Im more than proud to be a homophobe. You may call it whatever you wish to make yourself feel better about being you. Fact is, people tend to stay away from things they dislike or make them feel uncomfortable. So, if somone doesnt like TV and they stay away from it they must be a TVphobe. Or is someone does not like a child molestor and they keep themselves and their children away from the person they must be suppering from Molestorphobia and that must be bad too. Even GOD did not and does not condone homosexuals so stop trying to justify it.
- 21/10/2003
- 17:27:19
- Score: 3 out of 7 people found this comment useful.
\"Dues to the fact that orphan children need a normal life.\"How normal is two lovers of the same sex?\"Even though they attempted to argue otherwise, Golombok and Tasker\'s study revealed in its results section a clear connection between being raised in a lesbian family and homosexuality: \"With respect to actual involvement in same-gender sexual relationships, there was a significant difference between groups. . . . None of the children from heterosexual families had experienced a lesbian or gay relationship.\" By contrast, five (29 percent) of the seventeen daughters and one (13 percent) of the eight sons in homosexual families reported having at least one same-sex relationship.[http://www.frc.org/?i=IS01J3]
- 21/10/2003
- 17:22:37
- Score: 4 out of 10 people found this comment useful.
This will be an interesting story for all you Christians. This was written in 3000 B.C.E. and predates biblical accounts by atleast 1500 years, if not more.http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/tab11.htm
- 20/10/2003
- 05:23:05
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
Saying something as trivial as violence on television causes violence in youth is like saying matches cause arsonists. So if Im exsposed to someone using matches all the time im going to go burn down some buildings? So are we too rescrict our children to watching flowers bloom on TV?
- 20/10/2003
- 05:15:51
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
The answer to the drug problem is a simple one to a logical mind. MONARCHY, why Monarchy you ask? Its rather simple actually, any amount of any drug equals a swift and violent execution. This is what the king of Malaysia guarenteed anyone caught with illegal narcotics. Hence, now the drug problem in Malaysia is almost "non-existant." Could a "Federal Republic" like the government of the United States impliment such a law? Not in this century, too many people would cry, "Unconstitutional," or "Too Severe a punishment." Legalization is not the key to the problem. You think its bad now imagine millions of people running around stoned all the time, yeah what a soceity that would be.
- 20/10/2003
- 03:14:02
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
Should be lined up and executed.
- 20/10/2003
- 03:07:43
- Score: 4 out of 4 people found this comment useful.
MONARCHY
- 20/10/2003
- 03:03:01
- Score: 14 out of 17 people found this comment useful.
This is the best essay I have read on this site thus far.
- 20/10/2003
- 02:56:54
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
I would have to "disagree." Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain how life evolves.MYTH: A person or thing existing only in imagination, or whose actual existence is not verifiable.SCIENTIFIC FACT: An observation that has been confirmed repeatedly by and is accepted as true. Scientific facts are considered to be 99.9% true.Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution.Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination.Biologists consider the existence of evolution to be a Scientific fact not a "Myth" or theory.
- 19/10/2003
- 23:58:46
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
ITs a good essay in an odd way. Alot of people do not like to think about uncurable things such as this. But it makes you wonder and think, "What if it happened to me?" Me personally, if someone gave me aids, I would kill them for the simple fact, they gave me a death sentance. The average cost of AIDS or HIV medication is around $15,000 USD for the "good" medication. Now imagine being poor and making minimum wage. The lovely thing about Federal Republics is we have to pay for everything including Health care. Imagine the difficulties of getting Health Insurance while you know you have HIV or AIDS.
- 19/10/2003
- 23:40:13
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
This is a really well developed and thought out essay.
- 19/10/2003
- 23:33:11
- Score: 4 out of 5 people found this comment useful.
But if the United States did not aid in the weakness of the republic and did not help in the demise of the Monarchy then hitler would of never risen. Democracy actually comes from Monarchy's contrary to what people believe. So the Weimar government was weak for tryin to "mock" the United States. The people thought the republic was weak because it could not get all the abundant natural resources the U.S. has immediate access to, and thus, power. Take away all the natural resources of the United states and you have yourself a third world nobody.
- 19/10/2003
- 21:11:01
- Score: 2 out of 2 people found this comment useful.
California's is way too strict. Washington State only counts "Violent" offenses as strikes such as, "Rape 1,2, Murder 1,2 Robbery 1,2, Kidnapping 1,2 Child molestation 1,2,3, rape of a child 1,2,3 and so on. you should add something like what you think should be an alternative to California's law since it is so vauge and severe.
- 19/10/2003
- 12:11:47
- Score: 6 out of 6 people found this comment useful.
You did a good job on this. You covered all the proper areas concerning the 4th amemdment. This is definetely an "A" paper. I had to write on the fourth amendment in one of my classes and this is alot better than the paper I did.
- 19/10/2003
- 12:07:04
- Score: 3 out of 3 people found this comment useful.
The only negative thing I seen in this essay was the use of "B.C." Instead of B.C.E., B.C.E. is the common use for refering to the past prior to 1 C.E.so it should be, B.C.E. instead of B.C.and C.E. Instead of A.D.. This is the new accepted forms.
- 19/10/2003
- 12:04:04
- Score: 4 out of 5 people found this comment useful.
This was a superb essay. Well thought out and well structured.
- 19/10/2003
- 11:59:26
- Score: 7 out of 7 people found this comment useful.