Asked by Robert
                The federalists argued that a Bill of Rights was not necessary because?
A. All basic protections were contained in the Constitution.
B. the anti-Federalists were being irrational.
C. it impedes the authority of the government.
D. it would take too long to ratify.
            
        A. All basic protections were contained in the Constitution.
B. the anti-Federalists were being irrational.
C. it impedes the authority of the government.
D. it would take too long to ratify.
Answers
                    Answered by
            Ms. Sue
            
    http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/
    
                    Answered by
            Robert
            
    After reading this link, would it be All basic protections were contained in the Constitution? 
    
                    Answered by
            Ms. Sue
            
    Right.
    
                    Answered by
            Robert
            
    Thank you Ms. Sue
    
                    Answered by
            Ms. Sue
            
    You are welcome, Robert.
    
                    Answered by
            Robert
            
    Actually the correct answer is "C" it impedes the authority of the government.
    
                    Answered by
            Ms. Sue
            
    I've found that I disagree with  many online schools' answers.
What does your book say about this question?
    
What does your book say about this question?
                                                    There are no AI answers yet. The ability to request AI answers is coming soon!
                                            
                Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.