i would say that A D and C would be my votes. not 100%. if its wrong give me a bad rating.
b. False
It is true that Social stigmas can prevent children with disabilities from getting treatment.
Social stigmas can indeed prevent children with disabilities from getting the treatment they need. Stigma refers to negative attitudes, beliefs, and stereotypes associated with certain conditions, including disabilities. When children with disabilities face stigmatization, it can lead to social isolation, discrimination, and barriers to accessing appropriate healthcare and support services.
Social stigmas can also affect parents or caregivers, discouraging them from seeking help for their children due to fear of judgment or societal prejudice. This can have serious consequences for the child's well-being and development, as early intervention and treatment are crucial for improving outcomes and quality of life for children with disabilities. Efforts to reduce stigma and promote inclusive attitudes can play a vital role in ensuring that children with disabilities receive the support and treatment they need.
To know more about Social stigmas:
#SPJ6
b. slow
c. turn left
d. Both A and B are correct
Catching a baseball in the air can be referred to or considered as an example of being able to overcome gravity. Therefore, the option D holds true.
Gravity is a concept that can be referred to or considered as an application of physical studies that relates to the forceful pulling capacity of the Earth. Any falling object falls on the Earth due to the gravitational force that it has. Gravity can be affected only by application of an external force.
For example, when a person or a player on the field catches a baseball in the air, when it was eventually going to fall on the ground, it can be said that the player overcame the gravitational force. Other conditions, given above, support the gravitational force.
Therefore, the option D holds true and states regarding the significance of gravity.
Learn more about gravity here:
#SPJ2
Tennessee had not redistricted since 1901, keeping rural districts in power. Baker versus Carr was a case in 1962. It was a landmark case in which the US Supreme Court decided that redistricting is justiciable question and federal court has the authority to intervene.
Further Explanation:
Baker versus Carr was a case in 1962. It was a landmark case in which the US Supreme Court decided that redistricting is a justiciable question and the federal court has the authority to intervene. The Supreme Court can hear redistricting cases. The defendants argued that restricting is a political question and federal courts have no right or authority to hear and resolve the cases.
The case arose against the state of Tennessee. It had not conducted the redistricting process since 1901. In the majority opinion held by five other justices gave the decision that the redistricting does not pass the test of a political question. The case did not impact electoral districts immediately. It sets an important power of the courts to address the question of redistricting.
There are six factors that defined any question as political. Issues like executive powers, foreign affairs on matters of political questions.
The case forced the state legislature of Tennessee is to reapportion itself based on its population. Each vote would carry equal weight. The state violated the equal protection clause.
Learn more:
1. How were the governments of Japan and Italy similar in the 1930s? check all that apply.
2. Storage containers for sensitive data must be approved by what government agency?
Answer Details:
Grade: High School
Subject: Political Science
Topic: United State Judiciary
Keywords: not conducted, redistricting, electoral districts, executive powers, equal protection clause.
b. utility
c. value
d. customer satisfaction
B)Christianity should be the basis of social reform.
C)laws shortening the workweek were unconstitutional.
D)child labor encouraged discipline and strong work ethic.