# data[].attributes.body
If John had been king of Babylon, the Magna Carta would have talked more about social class, and more punishments would be through the river. If John had been king of Athens, the Magna Carta would focus more on fair education, and be more democratic.

# data[].attributes.body
If John was the King of Babylon, I do not believe the Magna Carta would have even been made or if it was it would not limit the power of the king as much. The Babylonians believed in a social class of higher power and they did not want everyone to be treated equally. If John was the king of Athens, the Magna Carta would be even more strict in what the king can and cannot do because the Athenians believed that everyone had equal rights.

# data[].attributes.body
If John had been the king of Babylon, there may have not been as much of a rebellion to form the Magna Carta because the idea of equal rights was not as well established. Also, the reasoning behind the laws would be more based on his own justification rather than that of the church. The punishments in the laws would have been much more severe. If John were king of Athens, his values and rulings would be based on democratic and philosophical ideas. Also, the "free man" would include less citizens.
-Amanda and Annika

# data[].attributes.body
They would believe that it is not the only way but during some cases it might be the best option. It is an effective way of getting people's attention to ponder what different situations would have a positive effect on their country.

# data[].attributes.body
If John had been the King of Babylon following Hammarabi's laws the Magna Carta might have been less about fair treatment as much of Babylonian lifestyle depended on social classes and punishment. If John had been the King of Athens the Magna Carta might not have exsisted considering how string the obeyance of government law was.

# data[].attributes.headline
1 Socrates would advise them to stop rebelling and live under the law that they have an "agreement" with. He would disagree with their choices to overthrow the government.      2 No it isn't, but sometimes the most effective. Socrates would not agree. Hammurabi may agree only because his laws were a little more old school.                                         3 It would include something about slavery, and possibly something about education and universities.

# data[].attributes.subject
1 Socrates would advise them to stop rebelling and live under the law that they have an "agreement" with. He would disagree with their choices to overthrow the government.      2 No it isn't, but sometimes the most effective. Socrates would not agree. Hammurabi may agree only because his laws were a little more old school.                                         3 It would include something about slavery, and possibly something about education and universities.

# data[].attributes.headline
1.Socrates would say their wrong in their choices because you cant change something that's above you. You chose to respect or be just with what you have or choose to leave. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1.Socrates would say their wrong in their choices because you cant change something that's above you. You chose to respect or be just with what you have or choose to leave. 

# data[].attributes.body
2. Socrates and Hammurabi would both disagrees with this. Socrates would disagree because he would say it is unjust and if you are not ok with the laws you have the choice to leave. Hammurabi would also disagree because he believes the Gods put  the laws in place for a reason.
3. If John had been the king of Babylon, the Manga Carta would have talked a lot more about social class and punishments would be set in the river. If John had been king of Athens the Magna Carta would focus on fair education and democracy.

# data[].attributes.body
In this case, rebellion is the best way to change an unfair situation.  It is not the only way, but it brings more change, as the King was unwilling to compromise.  Socrates would have resorted to reasoning and discussion.  His philosophy was based more around questioning and discussion rather than actions.   Hammurabi, with the perspective of the King, would think that rebellion is disrespectful and outside of most citizens' rights.
-Annika and Amanda

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates would disagree saying that what some may see as unfair others see as just and according to the law. Challenging it or rebelling would show that you believe that you are above the law. Hammarabi as a believer of his laws and the fact that the Gods created them would also disagree. Challenging the laws would mean disobeying your Gods.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. Socrates will think the rebellion was not right because the law was an agreement between the king and the bar

# data[].attributes.subject
1. Socrates will think the rebellion was not right because the law was an agreement between the king and the bar

# data[].attributes.body
2. No. Socrates would say that people should talk to each other and solve the problem together; Hammurabi will not agree with this because he thinks the king's power is from the god, so no one is able to disobey the king.
3. In Babylon,  the Magna Carta won't give all people equal rights, and the king's power will be unlimited, there also won't be freedoms of church act.
In Athens, all free men will be equal in front of the law, there's no king, and governer's powers will be limited.

# data[].attributes.body
Rebellion being the only way to change an unfair situation depends on one's definition of "rebellion". If one's definition only includes verbally speaking up, then yes, rebellion is the only way to change an unfair situation. However, if it includes physical war and violence, it is not the only way to change an unfair situation. Socrates would disagree, because he feels on should obey the law and silently suffer waiting for change because the law is always just. Hammarabi would disagree because he feels the kings are chosen by the gods..

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates would believe it is right to put the Magna Carta into place because it is not breaking any laws and it is not destroying their form of government. But it does enforce laws more fairly. It would keep people from being unfairly prosecuted.

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates would say that the rebels are not above the law and the law raised them and therefore do not have a right to challenge it.

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates, after his conversation with "The Law", believes that one must tolerate unjust parts of society and that the one is greater than the many. The rebel barons are looking out for the many by challenging "the one" and "The Law" at the time... the king. Socrates would say to the rebel barons that they are wrong because, in this case, "The Law" is the king, and the barons are not superior to the law. If anything, the rules are better than the barons

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Socrates would say "You have done good but, how about next time you do great." He would like that they are making a change however, he wouldn't like their threatening words and promised violence.

2. No, rebellion is not the only way to change an unfair situation. Socrates didn't believe in going against the state, so he would not agree. Hammurabi would not agree as well because, he looked to the God's for rule making and believed in equality of punishment, and if you're not happy where you live, leave.

3. Athens wouldn't be the place in history that everyone looked at for equality, fair trial, and great leaders, and the Magna Carta would have more rules applying for Greek Gods instead of obeying the "English Church"

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates may have either agreed or not agreed with the rebellion of the barons. In Crito, he thought that one should follow the laws that were set in place, but in this case, the laws were not as well established so his argument would not have applied.
-Amanda and Annika

# data[].attributes.body
1. Socrates would say that the laws were put in place for everyone to follow and be safe. Rebelling against it would be unjust because that the laws were made by the king and not the whole city.
2. No you can always try and talk to the leaders and I think Socrates and Hammurabi wold not agree because they think the smartest people in the world should lead not the world.
3. I think if John had been king of Babylon the Magna Carta might have never been writing because there would have been just more violence. Also it might not have made the same impact it has today.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Socrates would say that the Barons are not above the law and the court and therefore they do not have the right to challenge the law.
2. In any unfair situation rebellion is not always the only way to change the situation, in Socrates opinion it is not the only way in his opinion Socrates would agree and say solve your one problem and leave whereas Hammarabi would say it is not the only way to solve an unfair situation also but he would say you cannot do anything because the gods chose your leaders.
3. The Magna Carta would have been less about fair treatment if John had been the king of Babylon and it would have been less restricting to the king, in Athens it may never have been because of the democratic views of the Athenians.

# data[].attributes.body
Socrates would say that the rebels are not above the law and the law raised them and therefore do not have a right to challenge it.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. Socrates would say to the rebel baron that they are for the most part trying to overthrow the law. He would also say that if it is to help the people then it is fair and just. He believes in following the law and leading by example in order to help and not hurt anyone. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1. Socrates would say to the rebel baron that they are for the most part trying to overthrow the law. He would also say that if it is to help the people then it is fair and just. He believes in following the law and leading by example in order to help and not hurt anyone. 

# data[].attributes.body
2. Rebellion is not the only way to change an unfair situation even though it may seem like that's the easier way to do it. Socrates would agree that rebellion is not the only way  because he is all about solving situations by talking it out and following the laws and rules. Hammurabi would also agree that rebellion is not the only way because he looked up to the God's for the rules and believed strongly in equality and everything being fair.
3. I think the Magna Carta would not have been as powerful if John was king because of the rules and laws that were set he was the one who made it powerful and took the lead for it.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Socrates would say that the barons are not above the law, the king established certain rules and it is not their place to challenge them.
2. Both Socrates and Hammurabi would disagree that rebellion is the only way to change an unfair situation. Socrates would say that you should leave and go somewhere else that has fair laws; Hammurabi would say don't do anything because the gods chose your leader and your laws.
3. If John were the king in Babylon, the Magna Carta would have been less resticting to the king's power since they believed their leaders were chosen by the gods. If he were the king in Athens, the magna carta would take almost all power from the king and give it to the people since they ran their government in a democratic system.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. I think that Socrates would at first strongly disagree with the rebel barons because they were overthrowing the law but in the end realize that not all law is just. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1. I think that Socrates would at first strongly disagree with the rebel barons because they were overthrowing the law but in the end realize that not all law is just. 

# data[].attributes.body
2. Rebellion is not the only way to change unfair situations but in most cases like this rebellion is the only option. Socrates would not agree to this because by rebelling you are overthrowing the law and society but in the rebel barons situation I think Socrates would agree in their actions. Hammurabi would also not agree because in his society a rebellion would not differ a kings decision.
3. It would be different because a rebellion in those societies would not be able to sway a king or a government nearly as easily.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Socrates would have disagreed with the rebel barons decisions because  they are the "sons" of England and they must not attempt to challenge the law.  After time, Socrates might change his point of view and therefore change his mind because they were rebelling for the good of society.
2. Rebellion isn't the only way to change an unfair situation, although it may, in some cases, be the most effective way. Socrates doesn't believe in overthrowing the government and laws who raised you, but Hammurabi would see no problem in rebelling against the one person who has way more power than is necessary for one.
3. If John were the king of Babylon, laws would have ended up being much more unjust than they were due to separation of different social classes. In Athens, they had a democratic point of view so the Magna Carta may have never been written.

# data[].attributes.body
1.  I think that Socrates would praise the rebel barons because by living in England the barons agree to the laws, but that does not mean they cannot change them. In Crito, The Laws speak about how it is unfair if the people disobey the laws without trying to change them, so I think Socrates would respect their decision to alter them for the good of society.
2.  No, rebellion is not the only way to fix an unfair situation, but in this case, it was necessary because the king had all of the power. I think Socrates would disagree and think there is a more peaceful way to come to a conclusion because he disagrees with the idea of fighting evil with evil. Although, I think Hammurabi would agree because he supports the action of an eye for an eye, so if the king had done bad for him, Hammurabi would return the action.
3. I don't think the Magna Carta would be as powerful if John had been the king of Babylon, the people probably wouldn't have attempted to change them because the laws came from the Gods. Although, I think that the Magna Carta would have a similar impact on the community of Athens because the people were very educated and wanted a more present position in the government.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think Socrates would say the rebel barons were just in their decision. By living in England, the rebel barons agree to the laws, but if they are found unfair then they have the right to change or revise the laws for the better of the kingdom and people.
2. No, rebellion is not the only way to change an unfair situation, but when the two or more parties fail to compromise then it becomes the best solution. I think Socrates would want to explore more peaceful ways to change an unfair situation, but ultimately he would make the most educated decision. I think Hammurabi would think that rebellion is the best option because he believed an eye for an eye.
3.  In Babylon, I don't think the Magna Carta would have been as impactful because the people believed that the laws came from the Gods, do I don't think there would've been a need for the Magna Carta. In Athens, I think it would have a similar effect, but it would not need as many revisions because the people were more educated and had more a position in the government.

# data[].attributes.body
#1. Socrates would not approve of the barons actions because he believed no individuals are above the law.
#2. Rebellion is not the only way to solve an unfair situation. Socrates would try and resolve the situation between reasoning and and voting. Hammurabi would believe that rebellion would be the best way to solve the situation.
#3. If John had been the King of Babylon, the Magna Carta might not have existed because it would've resulted in more violence. In Athens, the result might have been better because of the more fair voting system.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. I think Soc would say that they are trying to overthrow the law (made by the king), and they are being unjust even though the laws themselves may be unjust. He may have argued that the barons could have left whenever they wanted, so they shouldn't overthrow them. If the laws are doing them evil, they shouldn't repay it with evil, just like Soc didn't when he was being executed. 

# data[].attributes.subject
1. I think Soc would say that they are trying to overthrow the law (made by the king), and they are being unjust even though the laws themselves may be unjust. He may have argued that the barons could have left whenever they wanted, so they shouldn't overthrow them. If the laws are doing them evil, they shouldn't repay it with evil, just like Soc didn't when he was being executed. 

# data[].attributes.body
2.  I don't think it is the only way, but I think it is the most effective, long lasting way in this situation. Soc probably wouldn't agree because he doesn't believe in overthrowing the government. I do think Hammurabi would agree with rebellion because he believes in an eye for an eye. So if the government does him wrong, he would retaliate with rebellion.

3. Babylon: They would have a much more defined class separation because if you were a slave(or a woman), you probably would not have the same rights to due process of law. For example, if a man accused his wife of cheating in Babylon, there probably wasn't an extensive investigation, where according to the Magna Carta, there should be.
Athens: The Athenians had a democracy. I think in Athens fair process of law would be granted to citizens which are freeborn, property holding adult males. Athens had a similar system because they also had a jury of people. They also wanted to prevent people from having too much power.

# data[].attributes.headline
1 Socrates would advise them to stop rebelling and live under the law that they have an "agreement" with. He would disagree with their choices to overthrow the government.

# data[].attributes.subject
1 Socrates would advise them to stop rebelling and live under the law that they have an "agreement" with. He would disagree with their choices to overthrow the government.

# data[].attributes.body
2 No it isn't, but sometimes the most effective. Socrates would not agree. Hammurabi may agree only because his laws were a little more old school.
3 It would include something about slavery, and possibly something about education and universities.

# data[].attributes.headline
1. Socrates would say that it was wrong because of his beliefs of no individual citizens are above the law.

# data[].attributes.subject
1. Socrates would say that it was wrong because of his beliefs of no individual citizens are above the law.

# data[].attributes.body
2.I think it depends on what the situation is but in this case yes it was, because the government was so unfair and that is the only way it could of be solved right away. But I also don't think its a good way to solve an unfair situation. Socrates would not agree. Hammurabi would not agree.
3.If John was king the Magna Carta might not exist because he might not of treated his people so unfair.

# data[].attributes.body
What would Socrates say to the rebel barons about their situation and choices?

# data[].attributes.body
Is rebellion the only way to change an unfair situation? Would Socrates agree? Would Hammurabi agree?

# data[].attributes.body
How might the Magna Carta have been different if John had been the king of Babylon, of Athens?