Read the passage from eleanor roosevelt’s speech on the adoption of the universal declaration of human rights. the first two paragraphs of the amendment to article 3 deal with the question of minorities, which committee 3 decided required further study, and has recommended, in a separate resolution, their reference to the economic and social council and the human rights commission. as set out in the soviet amendment, this provision clearly states "group," and not "individual," rights. the soviet amendment to article 20 is obviously a very restrictive statement of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. it sets up standards which would enable any state practically to deny all freedom of opinion and expression without violating the article. it introduces the terms "democratic view," "democratic systems," "democratic state," and "fascism," which we know all too well from debates in this assembly over the past two years on warmongering and related subjects are liable to the most flagrant abuse and diverse interpretations. what argument does roosevelt make in this passage? if the assembly fails to approve the soviet amendments, individual freedom may soon disappear. if the assembly fails to approve the soviet amendments, the soviets might have to declare war. the soviet amendments mention fascism, which is too controversial a topic for the udhr. the soviet amendments endanger human freedoms by emphasizing group rights over individual rights.

answer by yourhope:

the speaker of which statement would be best served by joining an interest group?

i want politicians to make more of an effort for lgbt rights!

: )

to force terrorists groups to stop attacking western targets using massive military force.

congress seems to have some powers the states do not have. they can do some pretty big things, they can declare war. and they can lead armies and navies. they also have the power to create a mail delivery system, make foreign treaties, print and borrow money, (both states and congress can do that)and make rules for certain places, i think they said the western states.  

the new government has been a big to growing their country! they are getting new land over west. and they are passing laws which to settle boundary issues.  

although most of this information sounds good for them, bad for us, there are some weaknesses from their plan. the people are still having issues with taxes and trading goods, they also don't have a main leader such as a chief or a president. they also have trouble with currency. the states are printing out so much money the national currency is beginning to be worthless. so things are getting hard to handle over here.  

some of the americans like the new government and think that even if they could ask about changing it they would be ignored. daniel shays got a group of people who hated the new government and decided to attack. this could become either worse or better.

(one-paragraph analysis)  

i think that they may start a war or some sort of big attack to make them change their government. most americans just don't want to discuss it. but i think that daniel man will speak up for them. if they do scare them they will get a better government and be able to deal with their issues better! i think that is what is going to happen next in the u.s., sincerely

lorelei     hope this i had some from the internet u   can report me if u want