In part iii of the statute, jefferson concedes that no law, not even this one, is “irrevocable”; he then declares that infringing on the principles in the statute would violate natural law. why might jefferson have mentioned the revocability of human law? what does he gain by doing this? what might he lose? answers should be at least 150 words.

perhaps, jefferson is the best spokesman that speak about american ideals of equality and liberty.

no one should be immune to the law because if there is an existence of someone that is above the law, a true equality would never be achieved

hope this

read more on -

if u dont know if ur gay or not u have to ask ur self dis

explanation:

paine is arguying that they had tried everything before coming to the conclusion that they needed to fight for their freedom.

argument: "every quiet method for peace hath been ineffectual."

claim 1: "our prayers have been rejected with disdain; and only tended to convince us, that nothing flatters vanity, or confirms obstinacy in kings more than repeated petitioning and nothing hath contributed more than that very measure to make the kings of europe absolute."

claim 2: "wherefore, since nothing but blows will do, for god’s sake, let us come to a final separation, and not leave the next generation to be cutting throats, under the violated unmeaning names of parent and child."