Ahigh school teacher wrote these bullet points on the whiteboard. what was the most likely topic of the discussion?

H: Reasons for immigration to the United States.

Explanation:

These are all very prevalent notions under the rationalization of foreigners for immigrating to the United States. America has been viewed as the "shining city upon a hill," which is to say it is an extremely desirable location for immigrants, particularly those looking to escape the hectic chaos frequent within their own countries.

Many countries attempt to religiously persecute their citizens. The U.S. is a free country, and the right for freedom of religious freedom and expression (as long as it isn't illegal/violent) is ensured.

Our Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution serves to highlight a plethora of rights and freedoms granted to American citizens. These were rightfully earned through the sacrifices of countless heroic and loyal lives.

The image U.S. often involves economic opportunity, especially in the 1800s and 1700s. Many immigrants migrated to the U.S. in search of work (take British immigrants for example, whom often left England and migrated to the U.S. because of the overcrowding within their own country and lack of sufficient work/pay). UNFORTUNATELY, they didn't quite realize that economic opportunities weren't much better in America during those times...

The U.S. is seen as a safe haven for countless individuals. This is because of our laws, rights, protections, and systems, as well as numerous other elements and aspects. This is definitely much more appealing when you live in countries with corrupted, tyrannical leaders and murderers, gang violence, destruction, and death ready to knock on your door (assuming you're lucky enough to have one). This is evident today with the U.S. relationship with Mexico, in which many of Mexico's inhabitants are seeking safe places for their families due to Mexico's unstable, violent environment.

during the debate over his landmark energy policy proposal, president jimmy carter failed to consult one of the most powerful senators, louisiana’s russell long, who would have a big say over whether the legislation moved through the upper chamber. this was classic carter. with a strong distaste for congressional politics, the president simply refused to do what most other presidents would consider routine, such as courting key senators. long became so irate with the president that when he was finally invited to a white house dinner, he stood up to ask a question and, before doing so, proceeded to sarcastically introduce himself: “i’m russell long, chairman of the senate finance committee.”

this interaction is a revealing moment in stuart e. eizenstat’s fascinating new history of carter’s presidency. the former peanut farmer from georgia was a president who, according to conventional wisdom, didn’t care much for party politics; nonetheless, in eizenstat’s view, carter’s legacy on domestic and foreign policy has been vastly underappreciated. the author paints carter as a “bold and determined” leader who bravely attacked the challenges of his time. eizenstat goes so far as to argue that carter might very well be the most successful one-term president in american history.