The Moral equivalence logical fallacy can be best described as which of the following? a. Fallacy which compares minor misdeeds with major atrocities
b. Oversimplifies an opponent's viewpoint and then attacks that hollow argument
c. Conclusion is based on an argument that the origins of a person, idea, institute, or theory determine its character, nature, or worth
d. A conclusion based on insufficient or biased evidence

a. Fallacy which compares minor misdeeds with major atrocities

Explanation:

The Moral equivalence logical fallacy refers to a scenario where the moral actions of different people are considered equivalent simply because of similarities they might have in terms of where they fall on the morality spectrum (right or wrong) regardless of the scale of the actions.

It can therefore lead to one comparing minor misdeeds with major atrocities. For instance: ''Did you just kill a cockroach? You're such a Jack the Ripper.''

i think the answer is c. there are many strengths

i hope this and if its correct mark me brainliest