Consider these two passages. Are they more likely to be arguments or explanations? 1. Late-term dilation and extraction abortions (called "partial-birth abortions" by those who oppose the practice) are a flashpoint in the abortion debate. Many argue that its advantages make it an indispensible option for many mothers: it avoids risky surgeries and expensive hospitalizations; and in cases of hydrocephalus (over-sized fetal cranium) it can be the only viable alternative. Opponents say it's tantamount to infanticide, as it involves removing the fetus, then terminating it; and they point to the graphic, gory nature of the procedure to label it barbaric. [Context: Newspaper article reporting on a bill pending in the legislature to ban late-term abortions] 2. The fifty-five mile per hour speed limit is an anachronism. Today's lighter, fuel-efficient, safety-checked automobiles are more than capable of handling highway speeds much higher. Moreover, lower speed limits only make the problem of long commute-times worse. [Context: speech by a member of the legislature about a bill to raise the speed limit to 70 mph]