James is asked to give a 5-minute eulogy at his friend's funeral. He gives a 25-minute eulogy, notes with admiration that his friend had the ability to consume enormous quantities of alcohol at one sitting, and comments that his deceased friend's wife is a terrific spouse because she "didn't nag like most wives about his drinking." This eulogy is probably inappropriate for which of the following reasons?

D). All of the above.

Explanation:

A eulogy is described as a commemorative speech or oration that is delivered at the demise of a person to recount and honor the achievements of the deceased person.

As per the question, eulogy delivered by James would be considered inappropriate due to the 'all the given reasons' as it is too long which goes monotonous and fails to create the desired impact of honoring the achievements of the deceased person. At the same time, it would most likely offend the women audience due to his sexist claim that 'deceased friend's wife is a terrific spouse because she 'didn't nag like most wives about his drinking' and 'bragging the topic of alcohol consumption' is both ethically as well as morally inappropriate to be discussed at a person's funeral. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

he will find out what went wrong or happened and how.

based on the biblical principle proverbs 16: 32, i agree with the author of the passage "better is it that it takes longer to be angry than the strong " to the extent that i share the philosophy that the nobility of heart demonstrates the strength of a person. those who are very proud, get angry easily and show their anger toward others are really weak, but those who are noble and do not constantly obfuscate or contain their feelings of anger, are strong people