Statement–Argument — Should sex-determination tests during pregnancy be completely banned? Arguments: I. Yes. Such tests enable indiscriminate female foeticide and risk severe social imbalance. II. No. Parents have a right to know about their unborn child.

Introduction / Context:
Sex-selective practices can distort demographics and entrench gender bias. The question is about a complete ban on sex-determination tests.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: Connects the tests to female foeticide and social imbalance—grave, direct harms.
• II: Posits a generic “right to know,” without reconciling it with harm prevention.

Concept / Approach:
In rights analysis, preventing serious, well-documented harms can justify restrictions, especially where misuse is systemic and enforcement is feasible with safeguards.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Argument I is strong: the policy goal is to prevent sex-selective abortions and demographic skew; the causal linkage is established in the premise.2) Argument II is weak: a generalized curiosity-based “right to know” is not compelling against documented harm; it lacks discussion of safeguards or harm minimization.3) Therefore, only I is strong.

Verification / Alternative check:
Effective regimes pair bans with monitoring and penalties while allowing medical exceptions unrelated to sex selection.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only II/either/neither” misrate the risk-harm argument’s centrality.

Common Pitfalls:
Ignoring systemic misuse when asserting broad informational entitlements.

Final Answer:
If only argument I is strong.