Answer:
b
Explanation: b c d e f g h i
The correct option is C. It seems that Mr. Sir is a strict character in nature.
<h3>
What is a Strict character?</h3>
A person of strict character ensures that people who work for them behave well and do not break any rules.
The complete Question is as Follows:
A man was sitting with his feet up on a desk. He turned his head when Stanley and the guard entered but otherwise didn't move. Even though he was inside, he wore sunglasses and a cowboy hat. . . .
. . . "My name is Mr. Sir," he said. "Whenever you speak to me you must call me by my name, is that clear?"
—Holes,
Louis Sachar
What does this description suggest about Mr. Sir’s character traits?
He is hardworking.
He is shy.
He is strict.
He is friendly.
Thus, according to the passage Mr. Sir is strict character traits.
Learn more about Strict Character here:
brainly.com/question/3347008
#SPJ1
I think its adverb. hope it help
Answer: See below
Explanation:
Human cloning should be allowed provided specific criteria and rules are satisfied. Human cloning is still dangerous, to say the least. Many people have long bragged about the prospect of cloning humans as a scientific advance, a gateway to immortality, free organs, and other benefits. However, 21 years after the first genetically cloned sheep, Dolly, there is still a great deal of ambiguity about the safety and ethical qualities of genetically cloning people. Scientists have cautioned that genetically cloned individuals are much more likely to have catastrophic genetic abnormalities and life-threatening health issues. Cloning has the potential to disrupt the development of a newborn human. One of the first genetically cloned calves, for example, died after just two months due to blood and heart issues.
This sort of cloning also presents serious ethical concerns. For instance, how is this different from murdering a child? Abortion is the only other case that resembles therapeutic cloning - the procedure of creating embryonic stem cells from the host's DNA - and the destruction of a human embryo. The only component of therapeutic cloning that would be immoral would be murdering a five-day-old person. Abortion regulations in some countries such as Canada already indicate that women may get abortions at any point throughout their pregnancy. So, how can one advocate for abortion while opposing therapeutic cloning? While abortions are performed to aid or even save a woman's life, one may argue that therapeutic cloning provides no such advantages. On the contrary, therapeutic cloning will provide access to life-saving medications to millions, if not billions, of people. Therapeutic cloning has the potential to potentially cure cancer, if only society could see how much the advantages outweigh the risks. To summarize, human cloning should be authorized if the cloning is therapeutic and the embryo is less than five days old, and future human cloning should be restricted until scientists have considerably decreased the hazards. Our laws already make it legal to abort a 21-week-old embryo if the mother chooses, much alone a five-day-old embryo.
<em></em>
