The answer is a because if the title is in the middle you always have to put quotation marks
Answer:
the answer is c
Explanation:
if you read the other statements they have nothing to do with the story and if they do they don't make sense
Answer:
thesis statement Geronimo became a bitter warrior after his family was attacked by José Maria Carrasco.
evidence The writer gathered evidence from Geronimo’s autobiography, which includes facts and anecdotes from his life. For example, Geronimo burned his belongings, his children’s toys, and two tipis after the Mexican attack.
structure The essay reads well, but it lacks the traditional structure of essays. Some irrelevant discussion is included as well.
strategies The writer uses a cause-and-effect strategy and an appeal to emotions (pathos). He argues that the cause was the Mexican attack on the Apache camp, which resulted in the death of his mother, wife, and three children. The effect was Geronimo becoming a ruthless warrior.
The appeal to emotions (pathos) comes in the description of the attack on Geronimo’s family. Rielly also describes Geronimo standing alone in a river after the attacks as a way of showing his state of mind after losing his family.
fallacies Edward Rielly’s article about Geronimo doesn’t seem to have many obvious logical fallacies.
overall quality This is a good essay. It focuses on providing solid supporting evidence, and it demonstrates clear cause-and-effect relationships.
Explanation:
Why does Edwards claim that nonbelievers are akin to spiders in "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God"?
<span>II. Spiders are powerless should a rock fall on them.
</span>
The passage states that a spider's web is not strong enough to stop a falling rock. Its home will be destroyed and the spider must rebuild his web again.
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.
