How were the reigns of james i and charles i different from those of the tudors before them? a. james i and charles i clashed with parliament. b. james i and charles i eliminated heavy taxes. c. james i and charles i supported the protestants. d. james i and charles i did not believe in the divine right of kings.

The correct answer is A. James I and Charles I clashed with Parliament.

Explanation:

Option D is wrong because James I and Charles I did actually believe in the divine right of kings and that only God could criticize their actions or direct their reign.

Although the Tudors believed in divine right, the masked this belief as they thought that good relationship with the Parliament were a valuable thing. For example, they would seek approval of the Parliament to levy new taxes.

On the other hand, James I and Charles I had a tormentuous relationship with the Parliament. JamesI said that the very existence of Parliament was a sign of sedition in subjects who could dispute what a king may do with his divine power. Charles I went even further dissolving Parliament in 1629 and ruling without it for eleven years.

A. James I and Charles I clashed with Parliament.

Explanation:

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.