Anchor: The recipients argued that the regulations constituted impermissible viewpoint discrimination favoring an antiabortion position over a proabortion approach in the sphere of family planning.
Entailed: Regulations were favoring antiabortion instead of proabortion in family planning.
Contradiction: The regulations were proabortion.
Contradiction: The person is about to fall.
Contradiction: A dog looks at a second dog.
Contradiction: The two men are drinking water at the bar.
Contradiction: A group of people are in suits