I goes into reason. Hence I is strong . II is weak because it is not advocating whether despite being cumbersome for the regulators it is beneficial for the people or not.
I is obviously strong. II is weak because freedom of speech does not mean sending racist messages.
I is weak because it does not hit at the main question ___''rearing endangered species''. II is weak because it assumes that rearing musk deer will diminish their number. Experience, on the other hand, tells us that rearing of a species for commercial purposes only adds to its number.
I is strong : it reveals the very purpose of registration of marriages. II is an absurd argument.
Any private services can't be banned only because there are charges against manipulation which can be rectified by legal actions. Hence I weak. II is also weak because of the word 'always'.
Both communal harmony and furthering of social customs are desirable.
I is strong because it goes into reason and keeps humanity above all. II is also strong because being a secular country India needs to respect the freedom of all religions.
Both arguments are ridiculous. Neither of them says about the positive or negative aspect which compels India to attack or restrain itself to take such harsh initiatives.
I goes into reason. Hence is strong. II is based on wrong assumption.
I is not strong because ''more emphasis'' on one aspect can't be interpreted as an insult to the other aspect. II does not carry any substance.
II says about the need and outcome of the initiative. Hence, II is strong. But I does not say how the grievances of the people will enhance.
Comments
There are no comments.Copyright ©CuriousTab. All rights reserved.