What argument does the author anticipate and indirectly refute in this excerpt from the declaration of independence? in every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. a prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

If the colonists are suffering, they need to first submit a petition to Parliament.

Explanation:

The author is talking about how the settlers are unhappy about many things and this unhappiness should be claimed from the parliament, so the parliament should have a representative of the settlers. That is, what the author anticipates and indirectly remarks is that if the settlers are suffering, they must first submit a petition to Parliament.

hi there!

sorry i was debating over answering this question or not, but i do believe it is a sin to be gay. in the beginning, god created man and he created women to be a for man. there are many "political" views on this topic but i believe the bible is right. in the kjv bible, leviticus 18: 22, god talks about how it it is an abomination for women to be with women and man to be with man. god knows that everybody is a sinner, and he gives everyone a chance to repent. i'm not forcing god's word on anybody, but i do believe it is a sin. no matter the sin, as long as you repent, god is willing to forgive, you just have to accept him as your lord and savior.

xjcbxjbv bcxbvjdbjvbcjvjdvbvbdkc