Pls help asap :( this is for world history

Answer:  Lincoln believed slavery should not spread to new states, while Douglas believed each state should decide the matter for itself.

History/context:

Senator Stephen Douglas proposed a bill in Congress in 1854 that became the Kansas-Nebraska Act.  The Kansas-Nebraska Act granted popular sovereignty to the people in the Kansas and Nebraska territories as they would enter the Union as states, letting them decide whether they'd allow slavery.  Douglas' support for the Kansas-Nebraska Act was indicative of his approach on the issue of slavery.  

In a speech Lincoln gave during the 1858 campaign for the US Senate, challenging Illinois' incumbent Senator Stephen Douglas, Lincoln had said of slavery, "Although volume upon volume is written to prove slavery a very good thing, we never hear of the man who wishes to take the good of it, by being a slave himself."  Lincoln was morally opposed to slavery, but he also recognized that slavery was permitted by the existing law of the land, the US Constitution.  So Lincoln's initial position on slavery was to stop the spread of it.  

Lincoln  did not manage to unseat Douglas from his seat in the Senate in 1858.  However, Lincoln did succeed in winning election as President in 1860.  When Lincoln was elected, states in the South moved to secede from the Union, which brought about the Civil War.

The progress of the Civil War made Lincoln increasingly strong in his stance against slavery.  The war initially was about preserving the Union, but later, with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (1863), was declared also to be about ending slavery.

Answer:

Historians have difficulty assessing John Adams's presidency. On the one hand, his aloofness and refusal to enter directly into political conflict probably undermined his effectiveness and cost him his reelection in 1800. His stubborn independence left him politically isolated and alone.

Explanation:

The Code of Hammurabi contributed to U.S. political thought by providing an example of how uniform written rules can promote a flourishing society. This is the best assessment among the options given.

Option A is incorrect because the Code of Hammurabi was not used by philosophers of England, France, and East Asia in their political writing. Option B is also incorrect because Hammurabi was not the first leader of the U.S. and did not bring his code with him. Option D is incorrect because the Supreme Court does not use the Code of Hammurabi to rule on cases today.

The Code of Hammurabi, created in ancient Babylon around 1754 BCE, was one of the earliest known sets of written laws. It consisted of 282 laws that covered various aspects of Babylonian society, including criminal justice, property rights, and economic regulations. The code emphasized the importance of uniformity and clarity in legal rules, as well as the idea of equal justice for all.

In U.S. political thought, the Code of Hammurabi serves as an early example of the benefits of written laws. It showed that having a set of clearly defined rules, accessible to all members of society, could help promote order, fairness, and social stability. This concept of written laws influencing governance and promoting a flourishing society has had a lasting impact on U.S. political thought.

To summarize, the Code of Hammurabi contributed to U.S. political thought by exemplifying the idea that uniform written rules can be beneficial for society.

I hope that this helps you. :)

Answer:

the code of Hammurabi contributed to US political thought as an example of how uniform written rules could promote a flourishing society.

Explanation:

in us political thought the code of hammurabi serves as an early example of the benefits of written laws. having clear definite rues accessible to all would help promote order fairness and social stability

the correct answer can be interpreted as:

the code of Hammurabi contributed to US political thought as an example of how uniform written rules could promote a flourishing society.