What are the philosphical ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence?
Comparisson of the differences and similarites of the Atricles of Confederation and the Consitution?
As an indentured servant in MD whoose a major argument of rratification of the constitution would support and also not support.
Please post your ideas on these questions, and we'll be glad to comment and add to them, if necessary.
http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm
from http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=differences+articles+of+confederation+constitution&aq=1&oq=differences+articles&aqi=g2
The 3rd not-quite-a-question is not understandable. Please clarify.
Sorry,
As an indentured servant in Maryland choose one major argument for ratification of the constitution that you would support and one that you would not support.
Only YOU can respond to that last one:
YOU must choose two major arguments regarding ratification of the Constitution -- one YOU can support (and tell why) and one YOU would not support (and tell why).
To understand the philosophical ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence, you can start by reading the document itself. The Declaration of Independence was adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, and it laid out the reasons why the thirteen colonies were separating from British rule.
The main philosophical ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence are:
1. Natural Rights: The document asserts that all men are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights, such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These rights are considered inherent and cannot be taken away by any government.
2. Social Contract: The Declaration emphasizes the concept of a social contract between the government and the people. It states that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed and can be altered or abolished if they become destructive of the people's rights.
3. Popular Sovereignty: The Declaration emphasizes the power of the people and their right to self-governance. It argues that governments should exist to secure the rights of the people and can be overthrown if they fail to do so.
Moving on to comparing the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, here's how you can go about it:
The Articles of Confederation were adopted as the first constitution of the United States in 1781. However, they were later replaced by the Constitution in 1789. The Articles of Confederation established a weak central government with most of the power residing in the individual states, while the Constitution created a stronger federal government.
Some key differences between the two documents are:
1. Power of the Central Government: Under the Articles of Confederation, the central government had limited power and was unable to raise taxes or regulate trade effectively. In contrast, the Constitution granted more powers to the federal government, such as the ability to tax and regulate commerce.
2. Representation: The Articles of Confederation provided for equal representation of states in Congress, regardless of size or population. In contrast, the Constitution introduced a bicameral legislature, with the House of Representatives based on population and the Senate providing equal representation for each state.
As an indentured servant in Maryland, if you were considering arguments for and against the ratification of the Constitution, one major argument in favor would be:
- Greater protections for individual rights: The Constitution included the Bill of Rights, which provided explicit protections for individual freedoms. This could be seen as a positive change for someone in a position like an indentured servant, as it would offer them more legal protections.
On the other hand, a major argument against the ratification of the Constitution could be:
- Fear of centralized power: The stronger central government proposed by the Constitution might be seen as a threat to individual liberties and the power of the states. As an indentured servant, you might have concerns that a powerful federal government could potentially overlook or neglect the rights and needs of individuals.
Remember, with historical topics, it's important to further explore and analyze various perspectives and primary sources to better understand the context and nuances surrounding these complex issues.