To answer the question regarding the differences between the two texts based on the given options, here's an analysis:
-
The author of the second text is confident she knows that Congress should pass the equal rights amendment.
- This statement can only be validated with knowledge of the second text. Without its content, we cannot assess its confidence or stance on the equal rights amendment.
-
The author of the first text references his personal experiences, while the author of the second text does not.
- The provided passage from Patrick Henry's speech does not explicitly reference personal experiences. Similarly, without the second text, we cannot confirm whether it references personal experiences either.
-
The author of the first text is confident he knows what should be done, while the author of the second text is not.
- Patrick Henry expresses a strong sense of urgency and confidence in his call to action against British oppression. Without the second text, we cannot ascertain its author's level of confidence or indecision.
-
The author of the second text references her personal experiences, while the author of the first text does not.
- Like previously mentioned, we do not have access to the second text to determine this distinction.
Given that we have no knowledge of the contents of the second text, it is challenging to definitively answer the question. However, based on the passage from Henry, it is clear he is confident in his stance regarding the need for action.
Therefore, the most accurate option, based on the information we have, is:
The author of the first text is confident he knows what should be done, while the author of the second text is not.
This assumes the second text demonstrates hesitation or uncertainty, which we cannot verify without its actual content.