Statement: Should sale of vital human organs be made legal in India? Arguments: I. No. It goes against our culture. II. No. It will lead to unhealthy practices. III. Yes. It will end illegal trading of organs. Choose the option that best identifies the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
Organ sale legalization raises ethical and practical concerns: exploitation vs. potential reductions in black markets. Culture-based assertions alone are weak; harm-reduction and governance arguments are stronger.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Unregulated markets risk coercion and trafficking.
• Regulated frameworks may reduce illegal trade but need strong oversight.

Concept / Approach:
Assess which arguments are policy-relevant with mechanisms.

Step-by-Step Solution:
I: “Against our culture” is vague and not a policy mechanism. Weak.II: Predicts unhealthy practices (coercion, exploitation), a concrete risk directly relevant to policy. Strong.III: Claims legalization can end illegal trade; with strict regulation and transparency, this can reduce black markets (though not guaranteed). As a policy rationale, it is relevant. Strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Many proposals consider paired donation, registries, and strong enforcement to reduce illegal trade—aligning with III while acknowledging II’s risks.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“None” ignores II/III; “only III” omits real risks (II); “I and II” retains weak cultural reasoning.

Common Pitfalls:
Relying solely on cultural claims without considering harms and governance.

Final Answer:
II and III are strong