Which is the best strategy for responding to counter-arguments in your persuasive research essay? a. avoid addressing opinions that point out flaws in your thesis. b. ignore any evidence that does not support your own thesis. c. use language that will appeal to the emotions of your audience. d. respond to reasonable outlooks instead of weak ones.

D) Respond to reasonable outlooks instead of weak ones

Explanation:

A person who is doing an essay should have in mind the point of view of other people that are listening or reading because in that way they can get a reasonable and understandable arguments.

If a person is avoiding opinions as it says in answer a) and ignoring pieces of evidence that they have as we can see in answer b) it would be selfish because of the ones who are trying to understand the essay and to see every evidence that you have.

Use language that will appeal to the emotions of your audience would not be useful because the arguments would appeal anyway. (answer c)

no,

explanation:

because they are likely to use their corrupted thought process to get what they want. not what is better for the another reason they shouldn't is since they abused their rights as a us citizen they should have certain rights stripped away from them as punishment, such as the right to vote. due to the lack of proper behavior exemplified   from their actions , it would be hard for people to trust them because of their criminal record.   either directly (in the case of a referendum or ballot initiative) or indirectly (by choosing lawmakers and law enforcers). in fact, we do have certain minimum, objective standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that we require people to meet before they are given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. people who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards. and those crimes can include such “non-violent felonies” as, say, treason and espionage, or voter fraud and public corruption, white-collar crime and felonies merely “concerning drugs” — like trafficking in fentanyl-laced heroin and selling it to minors, for example. if you’re not willing to follow the law, then you should not have a role in making the law for everyone else.