1. Hunter-gatherers had only a few goods. Why was this important for them? a. They needed to be able to travel long distances.
b. They preferred to hunt rather than to make things.
c. They did not want to be robbed.
d. There were no places to buy or trade for goods.

In a sense we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. when the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the constitution and the declaration of independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every american was to fall heir. this note was a promise that all men—yes, black men as well as white men—would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. it is obvious today that america has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. instead of honoring this sacred obligation, america has given the negro people a bad check, a check that has come back marked “insufficient funds.” but we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. we refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. and so we’ve come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and security of justice. in this section of the speech, analyze martin luther king’s connection between a defaulted promissory note and the lack of freedom experienced by african americans. which option offers the best analysis? question 3 options: a.mlk creates this analogy to communicate that america has enough freedom for all, but it needs to live up to its promises. b. mlk makes the analogy that america has run out of freedom. not everyone deserves to have it. c.mlk communicates that america should equally distribute funds to all citizens. everyone deserves equal access to the government’s money. d.mlk demonstrates that america is improving in equality and should keep the forward momentum.

Which term is synonymous with natural rights according to enlightenment philosophers legal rights divine rights positive rights universal rights

Sara and her friends were at an iowa football game in iowa city. sara is a life long resident of iowa and goes to college at dmacc. while she was in iowa city, robert smashed into her car when he ran a red light. sara was seriously injured and taken to university hospitals in iowa city (fortunately her injuries were not life threatening but laid her up for a long time and she had to drop out of college for the rest of the semester). robert is from michigan and was in iowa city to see the game and then to party later. at the time of the accident robert was drunk (at least legally - he blew a 0.17 and the limit is 0.08). sara has sustained about $500,000 in damages between her current and future medical bills, pain/suffering, lost wages, etc. also her car was totaled in the accident. can sara sue robert in a federal court? explain why or why not. (be sure to mention the two primary factors associated with suing someone in a federal court in a case like this.)