In this task, you are given a question and a context passage. You have to answer the question based on the given passage.

Example Input: Why can anyone create a church in America?, Context: The first amendment to the US Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" The two parts, known as the "establishment clause" and the "free exercise clause" respectively, form the textual basis for the Supreme Court's interpretations of the "separation of church and state" doctrine. Three central concepts were derived from the 1st Amendment which became America's doctrine for church-state separation: no coercion in religious matters, no expectation to support a religion against one's will, and religious liberty encompasses all religions. In sum, citizens are free to embrace or reject a faith, any support for religion - financial or physical - must be voluntary, and all religions are equal in the eyes of the law with no special preference or favoritism.
Example Output: first amendment

Example Input: What close language also had something similar happen?, Context: This change is interesting from a sociolinguistic point of view because it has apparently happened relatively recently, in the 1970s, and was pioneered by older well-educated women from the upper middle classes. The lowering of the diphthongs has long been current in many Dutch dialects, and is comparable to the English Great Vowel Shift, and the diphthongisation of long high vowels in Modern High German, which centuries earlier reached the state now found in Polder Dutch. Stroop theorizes that the lowering of open-mid to open diphthongs is a phonetically "natural" and inevitable development and that Dutch, after having diphthongised the long high vowels like German and English, "should" have lowered the diphthongs like German and English as well.
Example Output: Polder Dutch

Example Input: What is affirmative action trying to fix?, Context: Terry Eastland, the author who wrote From Ending Affirmative Action: The Case for Colorblind Justice states, "Most arguments for affirmative action fall into two categories: remedying past discrimination and promoting diversity". Eastland believes that the founders of affirmative action did not anticipate how the benefits of affirmative action would go to those who did not need it, mostly middle class minorities. Additionally, she argues that affirmative action carries with it a stigma that can create feelings of self-doubt and entitlement in minorities. Eastland believes that affirmative action is a great risk that only sometimes pays off, and that without it we would be able to compete more freely with one another. Libertarian economist Thomas Sowell identified what he says are negative results of affirmative action in his book, Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study. Sowell writes that affirmative action policies encourage non-preferred groups to designate themselves as members of preferred groups [i.e., primary beneficiaries of affirmative action] to take advantage of group preference policies; that they tend to benefit primarily the most fortunate among the preferred group (e.g., upper and middle class blacks), often to the detriment of the least fortunate among the non-preferred groups (e.g., poor white or Asian); that they reduce the incentives of both the preferred and non-preferred to perform at their best – the former because doing so is unnecessary and the latter because it can prove futile – thereby resulting in net losses for society as a whole; and that they engender animosity toward preferred groups as well.:115–147
Example Output:
past discrimination