Question

founders who supported natural rights also supported adding the bill of rights to the constitution because
the bill of rights included
specific rights for people.
the bill of rights made it
easier to overthrow the
government.
they wanted the constitution
to include popular
sovereignty.
they wanted to limit
government power.

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• "the Bill of Rights made it easier to overthrow the government" is incorrect, as the Bill of Rights is about protecting rights, not facilitating government overthrow.
• "they wanted the Constitution to include popular sovereignty" is incorrect, as popular sovereignty is about people's rule, not directly related to the Bill of Rights' purpose here.
• "they wanted to limit government power" is a key reason, but the most direct link to natural rights and the Bill of Rights is that the Bill of Rights included specific rights for people (like freedom of speech, religion, etc.), which aligns with natural rights (inherent rights of individuals). Wait, no—actually, the main reason founders who supported natural rights wanted the Bill of Rights was to limit government power (since natural rights are inherent, and the Bill of Rights codifies protections against government overreach). Wait, let's re - evaluate:

Natural rights are rights people have by nature. The Bill of Rights was added to limit the power of the new federal government (to ensure it didn't infringe on people's natural rights). But let's check the options again:

• Option 1: "the Bill of Rights included specific rights for people"—this is true, as the Bill of Rights lists specific rights (like the right to free speech, etc.). But the core reason for those who supported natural rights was to limit government power (since natural rights are seen as pre - political, and the government should not violate them). Wait, maybe I made a mistake earlier. Let's recall: The Anti - Federalists (and some Federalists) wanted the Bill of Rights to limit the power of the federal government (to protect people's natural rights). So "they wanted to limit government power" is correct. But let's check the options' wording. Wait, the options are:

1. the Bill of Rights included specific rights for people.
2. the Bill of Rights made it easier to overthrow the government. (wrong)
3. they wanted the Constitution to include popular sovereignty. (wrong)
4. they wanted to limit government power. (correct)

Wait, maybe I misread the options. Let's list them properly:
Top left: "the Bill of Rights included specific rights for people."
Top middle: "the Bill of Rights made it easier to overthrow the government." (incorrect)
Top right: "they wanted the Constitution to include popular sovereignty." (incorrect)
Bottom left: "they wanted to limit government power." (correct)

The Bill of Rights was added to limit the power of the government (so that it couldn't violate people's natural rights). So the correct option is the bottom left one: "they wanted to limit government power." Wait, but let's confirm the historical context: Founders who believed in natural rights (like Locke's idea that government exists to protect life, liberty, property) wanted the Bill of Rights to ensure that the government (federal) didn't overstep and violate those rights. So limiting government power was a key motivation.

Answer:

the option "they wanted to limit government power" (the bottom - left option)