请教：feifei-90

rynnchan

90. Current legislation that requires designated sections for smokers and nonsmokers on the premises of privately owned businesses is an intrusion into the private sector that cannot be justified. The fact that studies indicate that nonsmokers might be harmed by inhaling the smoke from others’ cigarettes is not the main issue. Rather, the main issue concerns the government’s violation of the right of private businesses to determine their own policies and rules.

Which of the following is a principle that, if accepted, could enable the conclusion to be properly drawn?  

(A) Government intrusion into the policies and rules of private businesses is justified only when individuals might be harmed.

(B) The right of individuals to breathe safe air supersedes the right of businesses to be free from government intrusion.

(C) The right of businesses to self-determination overrides whatever right or duty the government may have to protect the individual.

(D) It is the duty of private businesses to protect employees from harm in the workplace.

(E) Where the rights of businesses and the duty of government conflict, the main issue is finding a successful compromise.

答案：C

不太清楚原文的思路，看不出C里面的关系，请达人指点迷津

a principle that, if accepted, could enable the conclusion to be properly drawn这种可不可以看作assumption题呢？好像很少看到类似的问法

linxi107

题目大意是说政府立法要求私人公司将吸烟不吸烟的分开,然后评价是认为不公平,因为政府此举干涉了私人公司自己制定规则的自由.所以很顺理成章就选C啊,它说公司自己的自由比政府保护个人来得重要些.

[此贴子已经被作者于2006-3-14 20:35:15编辑过]