Premise - The government has justified its ruling on the grounds that this move will bring down incidents of rioting and arson that are associated with such protest marches.
Conclusion - The government of Country X has introduced new law banning the peoples' right to stage protest marches against anything they feel is offensive to their religious beliefs
Anything which supports the conclusion i.e. the government was right in introducing a law, is our answer
A.There have been many incidents of rioting and arson in the last two years and they have primarily originated from protest movements. (Not related to religious movements, It does not tell us why protest on relgious ground should be banned, eliminate)
B.The riots are not a result of the protestors but of a few miscreants who incite violence deliberately for their political ends. (For the same reason as above eliminate)
C.The numbers of cases of rioting and arson have decreased since the new government has come to power. (Irrelevant)
D.There are many diverse monotheistic religions in Country X and all of them are strongly represented in the national legislature. (Irrelevant – wordy and has been given only to confuse)
E.In the last two years four out of every five protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs have led to rioting and arson whereas in the case of protest marches on other grounds the proportion is one out of five. (This is our answer – It clearly shows that protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs have led to rioting more than any other gorunds, so government is justified in banning the peoples' right to stage protest marches against anything they feel is offensive to their religious beliefs)
Hope it helps !
First Attempt 710 - first-attempt-141273.html