Answer:
These evidences are gotten from his personal experiences, direct quotations, and examples.
Explanation:
King believed that the Vietnam War was diverting money and the attention from domestic programs which were created to help the black poor.
King's counter argument was:
"People will say that I am just a civil rights leader and have no business taking sides on the issue of war."
His argument was:
"The issue of America's soul is my concern whether it be about civil rights or war".
He said, ‘the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home…We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem.'”
Answer:
Explanation:
If we consider the Reformation as an action, then we must think of the context of the action. The Roman Catholic Church controlled religion life and had a strong hand on political life in 1500. The Emperor's ultimate authority came from God and the church, and religious unity was increasingly a key aspect of the emerging kingdoms.
When Luther proclaimed his thesis, he was challenging this status quo. Just as a force applied to an object at rest attempts to move it. He challenged the authority of the Pope over religious beliefs, but also the authority of the Emperor over political life. The force he applied soon found support, and the object started to move all over Europe, like an object sliding down a ramp, gaining momentum.
However, the Catholic Church and the Emperor would not let their authority slip without resistance. The Counter-Reformation used many of the tools Luther had used to try and counter his arguments. The Emperor suppressed movements and uprising and pursued the Reformers. Friction increased as the momentum of the moving object increased, slowing it and questioning its initial energy.
The American revolutionary war took place in the 18th century not the 19th
Julius Caesar was in tears because he admired Alexander. He had followed some of the customs and cultural ideas that Alexander made and brought to life. So Alexander was an ideal leader to Julius Caesar, and that is why Julius was in tears.
