Würdet ihr für mein comment eine eins geben?

Ich bin mir halt nicht sicher, ob mein comment in Fach Englisch mir gelungen ist, daher wäre ein Feedback nett :)

Many people argue whether or not the British monarchy should be abolished.

In the following, I present arguments for and against a monarchy so that you can form your own pinion.

On the one hand, the British monarchy should be abolished because a monarch only rules but has no real political power or function. this means that a queen or king is unnecessary and unimportant to the state.

Also, the UK is not a democracy, as is claimed, because in a democracy people can elect the head of state, but since the royal family is still alive, they will continue to be the head of state.

This is very unfair and unequal to the rest of the population.

Also, people can never be 100% sure if the next monarch is good for the state and does not have bad intentions.

This could make people very worried.

Another important aspect is that the royal family spends a lot of money on the palace when they could use the money for more important things.

On the other hand, the British monarchy should not be abolished, because a monarch is very important even if he or she has no real political power.  

His or her importance is reflected in national stability.

Since a monarch embodies the British history, values and tradition, this leads to stronger national identification, which brings people closer together so that there is national stability.

In addition, members of the royal family are very important to charities, because since the royal family has a good image and is important, charities can be heard better, so they continue with their charities.

Some people may think that a monarch spends a lot of money, but that doesn't mean a president doesn't.

there are many presidents with many

There are also many presidents with many offices, even more than the British monarch.

The fact that the royal family has always been at the head of the state means that people trust it because they know its good intentions.

This means that the monarchy is in safe hands, so to speak.

Another important point is that the royal family has shown that it can modernize and adapt to the times.  

This is very important because many people claim that they are unmodern and have different thoughts than today.

But the Queen, for example, has allowed her son Charles to marry a divorced woman, whereas in the past this was a very dangerous issue. 

that means she was able to “modernise”. 

Weighing the pros and cons of the British monarchy, one can say that it should not be abolished because the British monarchy has been very successful, mainly because it has adapted to the times and modernized.

Englisch lernen, Englisch, Abitur, englische Grammatik, Grammatik, summary, Writing, comment, englisch-lehrer
Habe ich meine Englisch Aufgaben richtig bearbeitet?

Hey Leute, ich würde mich echt freuen, wenn mal jemand raufschauen könnte😊!

Material:

Aufgaben:

1. Make a table with the statistics and pledges for the four countries.

Meine Lösung:

 2. State in a short text, what the oaths and pledges have in common and how they differ.

Lösung: The differences between the two ideologies is striking. If one swears an oath to the Constitution, it implies limited government by definition. It also implies that individual rights are paramount in the American system of governance. But when one swears to support the government instead of the Constitution, those principles disappear. An oath is self-pledging by which a subject or citizen acknowledges a duty of allegiance and swears loyalty to the monarch or country. In republics, modern oaths are sworn to the country in general or to the country's constitution.                                                                                                                   Also, this is a formal and serious promise to tell the truth or do something an offensive or rude word used to express anger, frustration, surprise, etc. Oath, as mentioned above, can mean either a formal promise or an insulting word. Additionally, an oath is more often used when the person making the promise calls God as a witness to the event, such as in the Boy Scout Promise. This often comes with a price if not kept; this can be death. In my personal opinion, an oath is presented as the most "serious" of the three words. In contrast to Oath, Pledge is a serious promise or agreement a promise to give money and something you leave to another person to show that you will keep your promise.                   Pledge is much less formal. Similarly, the Pledge of Allegiance is a promise of loyalty to one's country. Often, the pledge refers to an amount of money that someone is willing to give to another person.

3. Which of the countries’ oath is the most agreeable to you? Explain why.     The United States of America: Oath of Allegiance is the most agreeable oath to me because this serves to remind us that the United States is a constitutional republic with a federal system. The Oath also reminds us that the Constitution is the cornerstone of the American system. The government is supposed to be bound by the Constitution. As such, the government is not omnipotent, but strictly limited to the functions and purposes enumerated in the Constitution. Legislation, no matter how popular, is to be consistent with it, and any laws that conflict with it are invalid. 

Bild zum Beitrag
Englisch lernen, Englisch, Sprache, Englisch-Deutsch, englische Grammatik, English-Grammar, Englischsprachig, english-deutsche übersetzung

Meistgelesene Beiträge zum Thema Englisch lernen