PT4.S1.Q11 - Current legislation that require designated sections...

ironofff

Can someone draw out a Lawgic of this argument, so to see a link. (SA) Thank you!

canihazJD

I wouldn't do this one in conditional logic. It's just one of many tools we should have at our disposal to translate/understand the stimulus. This one is much more easily tackled with simple paraphrasing.

secondhand smoke bad - not the main point
gov dictating policy (to separate smokers) to businesses also bad - the main point
So, legislation is an intrusion that cant be justified.

So what you need is something telling us that preventing gov overreach is more important than the health concerns, which is what C gives you. The fact that you need this is somewhat camouflaged by the fact that the stimulus already tells you one is the main point and one is not, but we still need it as this does not tell us one overrides the other.

Just because you can diagram conditional logic doesn't mean you should. A hammer isnt always the best tool to fix everything.