When are objects immoral, and when is it right or wrong to possess them? does historic value supersede offensiveness?

ref:

They are immoral when the general values are violated. The material object, on which an action rests, can be of good or bad character from the moral. An object can be good or bad in the reason of the rules, the situation that is presented, or the intention or actions. In another sense, an object of a morally good nature can, in some circumstance, become, in a work of the situation, an immoral object.

Morality depends not only on the common parts of the object, but also on the relationships that are kept with the values, which allow us to act correctly before other human beings.

The historical value overcomes the offensive and transmits an essence of special respect to the respective object. Because it is of a spiritual nature, what gives it a special value in relation to things identical, but not linked to the historical event.

- three-quarters or two-thirds..

- "the constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the house of representatives and the senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the state legislatures."

< 3

either d or b, i'm not to sure. but my gut tells me it's prob going to be b