i dont understand how any rational person could vote for a man who bases the worlds most important decisions on his personal faith. i think its pretty scary.
Lately, I have been phrasing issues like this in the form of type 2 (Necessary) LSAT LR questions. I think that it is just a residual effect of all the studying. So, for this one, I imagine:
Cascagrossa: I don't understand how any rational person could vote for a man who bases the worlds most important decisions on his personal faith. I think its pretty scary. The NY Times recently feautured an article about how the President bases his decisions entirely on his faith, and someone like that is not worth voting for.
The argument above make which one of the following assumptions?
A) A President is worth voting for only if he bases his decision upon faith.
B) The NY Times is a credble source to quote from
C) The President does not base his decisions on faith
D) A President who does not base his decisions on faith would make different decisions than the current president, and thus be worth voting for.
E) All Presidents do not base their decisions upon their faith-based beliefs.
Which one is the answer?