"The speaker says she dislikes poetry but then makes an argument in favor of it" <span>is ironic about this excerpt from "Poetry" by Marianne Moore. The correct option among all the options that are given in the question is the fourth option or option "d". I hope that this is the answer that has come to your desired help.</span>
Answer:
Because Dred Scott and his family were born in the United States, they are citizens with all the rights granted by the Constitution.
Explanation:
According to a different source, this is the passage that the question refers to:
<em>"It will be observed, that the plea applies to that class of persons only whose ancestors were negroes of the African race, and imported into this country, and sold and held as slaves. The only matter in issue before the court, therefore, is, whether the descendants of such slaves, when they shall be emancipated, or who are born of parents who had become free before their birth, are citizens of a State, in the sense in which the word "citizen” is used in the Constitution of the United States. . . . . . . The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States."</em>
In this passage, the opinion of the author is that Dred Scott cannot be considered an American citizen because he is the descendant of slaves. The author argues that slaves were not considered as "citizens" when the Constitution was written, and therefore, their children cannot be citizens either. However, a counterclaim to this statement would be the argument that Dred Scott and his family should be considered citizens because they were born in the United States, and therefore, deserve all the rights that citizenship grants them.
This idea enhances Wollstonecraft’s argument by suggesting that women’s natural curiosity will lead to trickery if it is not nurtured through education.
<em>A Vindication of the Rights of Woman</em> is an exposition on overcoming the oppression and denial of the women in the society. It is a dedication to <em>Charles. M. Talleyrand</em> whose views on women education to Wollstonecraft were repugnant. She blamed the condition of adult women due to the negligence of girl's education. The women in the society only care about being attractive, modest and elegant. They are deprived to defend their fundamental rights and are treated as subordinates.
In her argument, she describes ways in which women combine their silliness. Their silliness includes visiting fortune tellers, reading a stupid novel, rivalries with women, and so forth. Due to women's low status and no education results in women's faults and not due to natural deficiency.
The correct answer is I, II, and III.
The first sentence support the thesis statement by using a metaphor: it compares a settler cleaning weeds from a corn field with men killing all types of life to comfortably settle in a land.
The second sentence expresses how men have devoted years and centuries developing and improving different types of weapons that would make them better killers.
And the third sentence shows that man has taken his desire for killing so far that he even wants to kill the microorganisms that live in their homes.
Answer:
to keep reader entertained.
