B) It is unnecessary to oversee the athletes involved in mixed martial arts.
The viewpoint made in section one is that "State athletic commissions should strictly monitor and regulate the UFC." A rebuttal statement is one that goes against the viewpoint, so it needs to say something about how the UFC should not be monitored or regulated. Option A agrees with the viewpoint by saying overseeing athletes is necessary. Option B states the opposite by saying it is unnecessary to oversee athletes. Therefore, this is the correct answer. Option C says that athletes must self-regulate. While this puts the responsibility of regulating on the athletes, it does not take it away from the commissions. There is nothing here to suggest that the commissions would not regulate just because the athletes are. Option D has nothing to do with monitoring or regulating so it is a poor choice.
Answer:
B) It is unnecessary to oversee the athletes involved in mixed martial arts.
Explanation:
The rebuttal statement that BEST refutes a viewpoint in section one is; It is unnecessary to oversee the athletes involved in mixed martial arts. A rebuttal is a statement asserting something to be false, incomplete, or in error. The last sentence of section one asserts that 'State athletic commissions should strictly monitor and regulate the UFC.' This is the same as saying that it IS necessary to oversee athletes involved in mixed martial arts (which is the sport of UFC). So the correct answer would rebut that viewpoint by asserting that it is UNnecessary.
