Category: 9th Grade English

What was Thompson’s theory of the relationship between sanctions and slavery? First of all, I want to tell you who Thompson was. Thompson’s full name was John Thompson. He was born in 1812 on a plantation in Maryland as a slave. He grew up there with his family consisting of his mother, his father, and his six brothers and sisters. Also, even still at a young age, he experienced the very true act of slavery when his sister was sold and never seen again. Like his sister, it was not long after when he was separated from his family as well by being sold away.

Back then, slavery was very very wrong. According to Google, slavery means “the state of being a slave.” According to Google, a slave is “a person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.” That means that somebody owns another person (that person is the other person’s property) and forces him to do his bidding (work for him). The slave people were Black people. People captured these black people for slaves. I do not know why, but I think that it was just that either the whites were just evil evil men, or the whites captured the blacks because they thought that the blacks were ‘animals’. I mean, just because blacks have different skin color or they have different religious beliefs does not mean that they are of any less importance than the whites. As it says in Acts 17:25-28, “²⁵ And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. ²⁶ From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. ²⁷ God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ²⁸ ‘For in him we live and move and have our being. As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring”. People capturing people and forcing them to work as slaves when they have done nothing wrong is just wrong. The black African people have been peaceful for years. But then, Americans came in and captured the blacks and forced them to work as slaves. All men are created equal, and yet, the Americans were treating the Africans like animals. It is a miracle that slavery is now abolished (no more) to this day.

“A sanction is a threatened penalty for disobeying a law or rule” According to Google. According to Dictionary.com, sanction means (as a noun because sanction can be a noun or a verb) “it is especially applied to situations in which one country’s government imposes economic sanctions on another to try to force it to comply with laws or certain expectations.” This means that if someone said “Do this or I will whip you.” That is a sanction. If you say something and threaten them that if they do not do it you will do something to harm them, that will motivate them to do it, right? That is how people made slaves work for them. Threaten them to do something or they will severely punish them. It worked for many slave owners, and some people still use it to this day, sadly.

So, back to the topic, what was Thompson’s theory of the relationship between sanctions and slavery? I believe that his theory was positive sanctions will receive a better result than negative sanctions.

What would I do in my autobiography that is different from what Darwin did? First, I want to tell you who Darwin is. His full name is Charles Robert Darwin. Darwin was an “English naturalist, geologist and biologist best known for his contributions to the science of evolution.” Darwin wrote a book called “The Origin of Species” in which he placed his theory of evolution. Now, we know that evolution is not real and that it is God who created the universe, but evolution was Darwin’s belief and we can not change that now that he is dead. “Darwin has been described as one of the most influential figures in human history, and he was honored by burial in Westminster Abbey.” Westminster Abbey is an extremely famous church, most recognized for being the chosen location for seventeen royal weddings, so he must have been extremely famous to be buried in Westminster Abbey. Darwin loved to write books. He wrote a lot of books on biology. He also won a lot of awards. Like FRS, Royal Medal, Wollaston Medal, Copley Medal, Doctor of Laws and Cambridge. He was very respected. He married Emma Wedgwood, and they had ten children. Can you imagine having ten children? I certainly can not. “In 1882 he was diagnosed with what was called “angina pectoris” which then meant coronary thrombosis and disease of the heart. At the time of his death, the physicians diagnosed “anginal attacks”, and “heart-failure”. It has been speculated that Darwin may have suffered from chronic Chagas disease.” His autobiography is a great autobiography and it sold out very quickly because it is the autobiography of a great person, powerful, and well known person. Which he was of course.

Now for the question, what would I do in my autobiography that is different from what Darwin did? Well, it did not give enough detail which is important for any autobiography. Also, he does not include his family in his autobiography. In my autobiography my family would be one of my largest subjects. And those are just a few of the things that I would change in my autobiography that are different than what Darwin did. I hope that you find a lot more.

Should I include reconstructed speeches in my autobiography? First, I would like to tell you what reconstructed speeches are. Reconstructed speeches are speeches or conversations or anything that you can not quite remember but you have to piece it back together. You may not get it one hundred percent right. So do what I like to do. Only recall the headlights or the parts of the speech that you can remember. But if you forget a very important part that you want or need to write down, ask someone who was also there and maybe they can remember it. But if you can not get in touch with someone who was also there, write down (if you are writing down) as much as you can recall from whatever you were doing. And if you are at a place where people are giving speeches or someone is giving you good advice for you later in your life, than take notes. Take notes so that if you need to remember them later than you will have good notes to remind you what they are so that you will not have to reconstruct it. It is also a lot easier that trying to remember.

So, back to the question. Should I include reconstructed speeches in my autobiography? And the answer to that is… that depends. That is right. The answer is that depends. Let me tell you why the answer is that depends. That depends is the answer because if you remember a speech or conversation that you want to include and you get it one hundred percent correct (or close) you will not need reconstruction on that topic. But, if you forgot some parts in a speech or conversation that you want to include in your autobiography you are going to have to include some reconstruction to fill in the parts that you forgot about. That is why you should journal. Journaling is like taking every day notes. If you journal than you can take every day notes to put in your autobiography. Plus if you journal you can remember a lot more so that you can put more stuff in your autobiography which is a very good thing. The more stuff you put in your journal the less you have to remember. The more good stuff you put in your autobiography the more interesting it is(just do not put any boring or unnecessary stuff in your autobiography or journal). When you write your autobiography it is sometimes fun to look back at your life while writing your autobiography because when you write your autobiography you get to look back at your earlier stages and write about it and tell people about your life. When I write my autobiography (if I ever do) it would be a lot of fun. I would have a blast writing my autobiography and looking back at my life before I would write it. It would be so fun. So remember, if you journal you can prevent reconstruction in your autobiography.

Who my target audience should be for my autobiography? If you have read all of my other autobiography essays than this should be easy for you. My target audience is mainly going to be my decedents. I have explained that a whole lot in my other autobiography essays. “I would write my autobiography so that years later from generation to generation my descendants would know about there family history and what happened years and years and years before they were even born into the world.” That is what I wrote in an earlier essay. It is true though. Very true.

What benefits would I get from writing an autobiography? Well, my mom gave me an idea. Here it is… I would want to write an autobiography so that my descendants would know what it was like living in my day and how my life went and what the economics were and a lot more so that they would know how to live there lives. I can also tell them my ideal way to live lives. It would also tell them were they came from, who they came from, and it would tell them there family history. I could also tell them what my life was about and what stuff in my time was like. Also, if I became a famous person some day I would definitely want to write an autobiography to show my decedents all of my great works so that maybe my decedents would know how to become famous just like I did. If I was a missionary, I would write about it in my autobiography in case any of my descendants want to be a missionary so that I could give them some pointers to how to become a missionary so that they can become one to, just like I did. So in summary, I would write my autobiography so that years later from generation to generation my descendants would know about there family history and what happened years and years and years before they were even born into the world. I could also tell them how to become the things I was. (I am really not all of these things. I am just saying them for effect.)

My dad also gave me an idea. It is called introspection. Introspection provides me with an opportunity to take time and see goals that I have not done yet or goals that I have not even set yet so that I can accomplish my goals or set them and then accomplish those goals. However, it does not fix it. It only provides you with an opportunity to take time and see goals that you have not done yet or goals that you have not even set yet so that you can accomplish those goals or set them and then accomplish those goals. It is very important that you accomplish or make then accomplish goals so that you do not become a lazy person. Never become a lazy person. I mean this as a warning. If you are a lazy person then that means that you will most likely become poor and dumb and that will not be good. So do not become a lazy person but instead do introspection. Take some time and see goals that you have not done yet or goals that you have not even set yet so that you can accomplish those goals or set them and then accomplish those goals. These two ideas are very good ideas if you want to write an autobiography and they are also good benefits for writing an autobiography.

What can you do now to make your biography less disjointed than Twain’s? Mark Twain’s real name was Samuel Langhorne Clemens. Mark Twain was just his pen name.  Twain was born on November 30, 1835 and he died on April 21, 1910 after a heart attack. Twain was “an American writer, humorist, entrepreneur, publisher, and lecturer.” He was lauded as the “greatest humorist the United States has produced,” and William Faulkner called him “the father of American literature”.” Twain wrote the famous books The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. My dad loves those books so much.

I recently read part of Mark Twain’s autobiography and it is very disjointed which means scatterbrained, not put together very well, back and forth a lot. There is a movie I like called Holes and it is very disjointed. You have to watch it a couple times to understand it. The movie goes into the past and back into the present so many times I could not keep up with the story line. The ideal autobiography I would want to read is a book on the important events in someone’s life. I do not care much for somebody’s life right from when they were a baby up to their death. To me, it is kind of boring. And I do not really like disjointed autobiography’s. They do not really make any sense. If I were to write my own autobiography than I would journal to keep all of my important memories in it. If you were to write your own autobiography than you would want to journal to keep all of your important memories in it. If you tried writing an autobiography without journaling, that would be hard. That is why if I were to write my own autobiography I would most definitely journal. Trying to remember things that happened ten (or more or less) years ago is extremely hard; even for me. If I were to write a autobiography for me or if someone were to write an biography about me, than here is how I would like it to be written. I would like it to start with why my biography was written. And then it would say my birth date and my death date (if I was dead at that time). Then it would say what extraordinary things happened in my life and why they were so extraordinary. I would also like the extraordinary things to go chronologically. And there would be no disjointed parts in the whole book. And at the end it would tell about how great of a person I was (if I ever was great, but I probably will be). The book would be a good book and it would never be confusing or disjointed or weird. It would be mainly on me and my successes (if I ever got any). It would never tell any unnecessary parts about my life or about anybody else’s life. And that is how I would like my biography to be written.

Why do you think Plunkitt was so open about how he made his money? First, I want to say a few things about Plunkitt. His real name was George W. Plunkitt to begin with. Plunkitt was a millionaire. Plunkitt was born on November 17, 1842. Plunkitt was a millionaire. He was also involved in politics. He was a politician from the New York State. He also served in “both houses of the New York State Legislature”. He was also “a vehement critic of the Civil Service”. He was a master in machine politics. Plunkitt was in charge of Tammany Hall for a time until he died on November 19, 1924; two days after his eighty-second birthday.

He had a very odd and strange way to gain power and help people at the same time. Whether he was in office or out of office, he did his best to find jobs for the people. Because he did this the people remained loyal and subject to Plunkitt, and that is how he got his power he had years ago. It is very impressive how he became a powerful man just by gaining the trust of the people by helping them find jobs. To do this he must have been really smart. The reason he found jobs for the people is because he cared about the people. He was in politics for some time and he knew that Patriotism was supporting the people of the state. Patriotism is supporting one’s country. The country is not the land, or the government, but the people. So, he thought that if he found jobs for the people of the state he would be doing the right thing. He did this whether he was in office or out of office. Plus, he gained the loyalty of the people which got him his power.  As I said before, To do this he must have been really smart. Well, he was a really smart guy. Don’t you think so too?

Now, back to the topic of this paper: Why do you think Plunkitt was so open about how he made his money? The answer to this is, He cares about the people. That is right. He cares about the people he told them his secret to how to become rich and powerful. Remember that I told you that he cares about the people so much he found jobs for people who needed them? He cares about people so much that he told them how he became rich and powerful. He did not want them to become poor, because what kind of person would people call him then? Besides, it was his duty to look after the people and take care of them. And one of the ways he could do that is if he told us his secret on how to become rich and powerful, which is what he did. He even wrote about it in his autobiography. He must have really cared about the people to give up his secret on how to become rich and powerful just so that they do not become poor.

How serious was Plunkitt about patriotism’s connection to obtaining a job after Tammany won an election? First, I would like to tell you who Plunkitt and Tammany are. His real name was George W. Plunkitt. Plunkitt was born on November 17, 1842. Plunkitt was a millionaire. He was also involved in politics. He was a politician from the New York State. He also served in “both houses of the New York State Legislature”. He was also “a vehement critic of the Civil Service”. He was a master in machine politics. And as for Tammany, it is NOT A PERSON. It is really called Tammany Hall. “Tammany Hall, also known as the Society of St. Tammany, the Sons of St. Tammany, or the Columbian Order, was a New York City political organization founded in 1786 and incorporated on May 12, 1789, as the Tammany Society”. Plunkitt was in charge of Tammany Hall for a time until he died on November 19, 1924; two days after his eighty-second birthday.

Plunkitt was a very powerful man. Here is why. Whether he was in or out of office, he did his best to find jobs for the people. Because he did this the people remained loyal and subject to Plunkitt, and that is how he got his power he had years ago. It is very impressive how he became a powerful man just by gaining the trust of the people by helping them find jobs. It is also a very smart idea on how to become a powerful person. He must have been a very smart person. It is also amazing that he could find jobs for the people or find people who could find jobs for the people. I think finding jobs for people is a weird, but efficient way to gain power and help people at the same time.

Patriotism is supporting one’s country. The country is not the land, or the government, but the people. Plunkitt’s idea of supporting one’s country (or people) is to find them jobs, in or out of office. Like if he had an open spot in anything for anyone who wanted to take it and he new someone who was jobless, than he would give that job to the jobless person, and he did that so that people would think that he was a very good person so they would remain loyal to him and that is how he got his power. As I said before, I think finding jobs for people is a weird, but efficient way to gain power and help people at the same time. It is also very creative.

How serious was Plunkitt about patriotism’s connection to obtaining a job after Tammany won an election? He was so serious about it that it did not matter if he was in office or out of office, or if he was rich or not, he tried to find people jobs because he thought that that was how patriotism worked, which it basically did, but that is how serious Plunkitt was about patriotism.

Which aspect of the plot of In His Steps so far sounds most implausible? In His Steps was written by Charles Monroe Sheldon. It is said to be one of the best-selling books of all time selling over fifty-million copies first being published in 1896. The full title of the book is In His Steps: What Would Jesus Do. I recently read it as a school book and I really liked it. It is nick-named What Would Jesus Do because at the beginning of the book Rev. Henry Maxwell, the pastor of a church, challenges everyone in the church that in every situation or problem they have they ask themselves “What would Jesus do?” for a whole year (but they did not have to do it if they did not want to). This phrase is referred to throughout the book. Some Christians even use this phrase now, two hundred years after the book was even published.

What I think is most implausible (which means not likely to happen) is when a random person comes to Rev. Maxwell’s house and asks Maxwell to find him a job. Maxwell says he probably can and the person leaves. The next day at church the man comes to church, comes to the pulpit, and says that the church treated him very badly (we never find out how) and passes out. He dies a few days later. I think this is implausible because people randomly passing out and dying later is not possible, and if it is, it is extremely rare.

What I think is also implausible is not the What Would Jesus Do challenge that Rev. Maxwell gives the church, but how many people in the church agree to do it. I mean, how often do you see a ton of people agree to a challenge like this? And doing it for a whole year just makes it sound even more implausible. Who, in present time, would do that besides Christians? I know no one that would. Do you?

Another implausible thing is when Rev. Maxwell is elected to give a tent meeting to the people about not going back to the town’s saloon and why it is bad to go back to the saloon and that the saloon is an evil place. When Rev. Maxwell finishes the meeting everyone who attended goes back to the saloon and ignores everything Rev. Maxwell told them. No one even stayed for the after meeting. Who does that!? Rev. Maxwell gave an hour speech on why the saloon is bad and why they should never go back there again.

I have read many pieces of literature in my life, but non have affected me as much as this one book. It is also the most popular, copied, and sold book ever written. It is also written over the course of four thousand years! It had forty authors, and a lot of them were not alive while others were alive. And that book is the BIBLE. The Bible is the greatest book ever written and will continue to be until the earth ends. The Bible is the book that most influenced me I had ever read. It is also my favorite book of all time.

When I was about two or three years old, I began having nightmares almost every night, so my dad put a speaker in my room and played the Bible on the speaker and I stopped having nightmares. I began memorizing the Bible when I was in Cubbies in AWANA (an organization all around the world to bring people to Jesus Christ and teach them about the Bible. AWANA stands for All Workmen Are Not Ashamed). The Bible has taught me a ton of things. Like how the universe came to be, how to be saved, very interesting historical facts, and so much more. The Bible is also very interesting to read. It tells the story of the beginning of the universe all the way to the end of time.

My favorite part of the Bible is when Jesus dies, but them rises from the dead. My favorite verse of the Bible is Proverbs 6:6-8, Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Without having any chief, officer, or ruler, she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest (English Standard Version). There are many other extremely wise verses in the Bible, like the ten commandments. Those are really important verses. And if you ever want to see how the universe was made, then go to the very beginning of the Bible to the book Genesis. And Revelations, the very last book of the Bible, tells the future of the universe. The Bible is the best book ever made. Jesus is the best part of the Bible. It is said that if all of Jesus’s works were written down on paper, that it would take up more space than all the books in the world would. Now that is a ton of things that Jesus did, especially for us.

The Bible is an amazing book. It has changed my life a thousand percent! And although I have not read the whole Bible yet, I am still learning a lot of interesting facts from the Bible. However, not everyone is able to have the advantage of having a Bible, so it is very good that missionaries are risking there lives to give people Bibles so that they can come to God and Jesus and be saved. The Bible has changed my life a lot and is continuing to change my life.