Issues over slavery and the balance of power between slave and free states has been part of the United States since is foundations-starting with the compromises made in the
U. S. Constitution. As the United States expanded and new territories were incorporated into
the Union the questions over the extension or exclusion of slavery in the new territories
became an important political question. This political question is one that became
increasingly fraught with tension as each side of the argument increased. Over the years
several compromises were attempted.
1. Missouri Compromise (1820) admitted Missouri to the Union as a slave state
and Maine as a free state to maintain the balance of power between slave and
free states
2. Compromise of 1850 resolved disputes over the slavery within the Mexican
Cession, new territory gained after the Mexican American War (California,
New Mexico, Utah). California was admitted as a free state. The New Mexico
and Utah territories could decide whether to allow slavery (popular
sovereignty).
3. Fugitive Slave Act required runaway slaves to be returned to their owners.
4. Kansas-Nebraska Act (1854) created the Kansas and Nebraska territories and
abolished the Missouri Compromise by allowing settlers to determine if
slavery would be allowed in the new territories (popular sovereignty). This led
to Bleeding Kansas, years of violence between Northemers and Southerners
who flooded Kansas to support oppose slavery.
Short
farinelartin and second

a molly pitcher

b martha washington

c betsy ross

the united states broke it's neutrality was the constant german sinking of trading vessels resulting in the loss of lives, one example would be the lusitania.

the covenant that god made with abraham was a unilateral (one-sided) promise from god to abraham.   apart from anything abraham did, god was promising that he was going to bring about a great nation from abraham's offspring, and that the messiah (meaning "the anointed one") would come from abraham's descendants, as one through whom the whole world would receive favor from god.   as god promised abraham, "through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed" (genesis 22: 18).

the "new covenant" was announced by jesus of nazareth, who had asserted that he was the "son of david" (and descendant of abraham) that fulfilled those promises to abraham.   when jesus introduced the sacred meal that we now refer to as the lord's supper, as told his disciples in reference to the wine they drank, "this cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you" (luke 22: 20).   this "new covenant" through jesus was also a unilateral (one-sided) covenant.   he gave himself in sacrifice for all people, without conditions attached.   as his friend and apostle john later wrote, "he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 john 2: 2).

so the covenant with abraham and the "new covenant" ushered in by jesus are, in essence, connected as one covenant -- because jesus was saying he was the one promised to abraham that fulfilled that covenant and brought blessing to the world.