Statement–Argument (Ban Sex Determination Tests): Statement: Should prenatal sex determination be completely banned? Arguments: I) Yes, it enables sex-selective abortion against females and leads to social imbalance. II) No, people have a right to know about their unborn child. Choose which argument is strong.

Introduction / Context:Where a practice foreseeably facilitates grave rights violations (sex-selective abortion), restrictions can be justified to protect vulnerable groups and demographic balance.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Argument I: Connects sex determination to discriminatory outcomes and skewed sex ratios—clear harm.
• Argument II: Asserts a generic “right to know” without addressing consequent harm or limits on rights when they enable abuse.

Concept / Approach:Strong arguments articulate harm and necessity. I provides a compelling rights-and-harm rationale. II ignores proportionality: rights are not absolute when they cause systemic discrimination.

Step-by-Step Solution:Assess I: Mechanism—information enabling selective abortion ⇒ demographic/ethical harm ⇒ strong.Assess II: Unqualified liberty claim without safeguards ⇒ weak.

Verification / Alternative check:Policy mixes bans with strict enforcement and awareness; this aligns with I’s harm prevention reasoning.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Either/neither” misreads the asymmetry; “only II” ignores documented harms.

Common Pitfalls:Treating informational rights as absolute irrespective of outcomes.

Final Answer:if only Argument I is strong.