Is it a crime for a citizen of the united states to vote?
by susan b. anthony (excerpt)
but is urged, the use of the masculine pronouns he, his and him, in all the constitutions and laws, is proof that only men were meant to be included in their provisions. if you insist on this version of the letter of the law, we shall insist that you be consistent, and accept the other horn of the dilemma, which would compel you to exempt women from taxation for the support of the government, and from penalties for the violation of laws.
. . the same is true of all the criminal laws: "no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself."
the same with the law of may 31st, 1870, the 19th section of which i am charged with having violated; not only are all the pronouns in it masculine, but everybody knows that that particular section was intended expressly to hinder the rebels from voting. it reads "if any person shall knowingly vote without his having a lawful right," c. precisely so with all the papers served on me-the u. s. marshal's warrant, the bail-bond, the petition for habeas corpus, the bill of indictment-not one of them had a feminine pronoun printed in it; but, to make them applicable to me, the clerk of the court made a little carat at the left of "he" and placed an "s" over it, thus making she out of he. then the letters "is" were scratched out, the little carat under and "er" over, to make her out of his, and i insist if government officials may thus manipulate the pronouns to tax, fine, imprison and hang women, women may take the same liberty with them to secure to themselves their right to a voice in the government.
2
select the correct answer.
what argument is susan b. anthony making in the passage?
a.
male citizens created the laws to secure the rights of men, so legal reform is required to secure women’s rights.
b.
women are often punished for committing criminal acts that are pardoned when committed by men.
c.
women are judged under laws supposedly written only for males, so they are entitled to the same rights as males.
d.
the court judge modified the original documents to arrest and try anthony unfairly.
reset next

first second and third

explanation:

an era of negotiation.

is that an answer to your question?

answer: a parliamentary system is a system of democratic governance of a state where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the confidence of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that parliament. in a parliamentary system, the head of state is usually a person distinct from the head of government. this is in contrast to a presidential system, where the head of state often is also the head of government and, most importantly, the executive does not derive its democratic legitimacy from the legislature.

countries with parliamentary democracies may be constitutional monarchies, where a monarch is the head of state while the head of government is almost always a member of parliament (such as the united kingdom, denmark, sweden, and japan), or parliamentary republics, where a mostly ceremonial president is the head of state while the head of government is regularly from the legislature (such as ireland, germany, india, and italy). in a few parliamentary republics, such as botswana, south africa, and suriname, among some others, the head of government is also head of state, but is elected by and is answerable to parliament. in bicameral parliaments, the head of government is generally, though not always, a member of the lower house.

parliamentarianism is the dominant form of government in europe, with 32 of its 50 sovereign states being parliamentarian. it is also common in the caribbean, being the form of government of 10 of its 13 island states, and in oceania. elsewhere in the world, parliamentary countries are less common, but they are distributed through all continents, most often in former colonies of the british empire that subscribe to a particular brand of parliamentarianism known as the westminster system.

explanation:

the  seven  days  battles  were  a series of seven battles over seven  days from june 25 to july 1, 1862, near richmond, virginia,  during  the american civil war. the  seven  days ended with mcclellan's army in relative safety next to the james river, having suffered almost 16,000 casualtiesduring  the retreat.