Its evidence -- the evidence of the sentience -- was to be seen, he said, (and here i started as he spoke,) in the gradual yet certain condensation of an atmosphere of their own about the waters and the walls. the result was discoverable, he added, in that silent, yet importunate and terrible influence which for centuries had moulded the destinies of his family, and which made him what i now saw him -- what he was. such opinions need no comment, and i will make none.

based on this excerpt, the narrator
a. supportive of usher’s theory.
b. skeptical of usher’s theory.
c. curious about the his

B. skeptical of Usher's theory.

In the excerpt the narrator is listening to Roderick Usher talk about what he thinks is molding "the destinies of his family". Usher says that the evidence is still yet to be seen. While the narrator does not outright dismiss Usher's theorizing, he also doesn't give any indication that he agrees with it. The narrator says, "such opinions need no comment, and I will make none." Basically, since the narrator has nothing to say on the matter because he's not quite sure, he's just going to keep quiet. It's obvious the narrator's thoughts or questions would not be of interest to Usher anyways.

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.

the answer to the question is a