Passage Summary: Glen thinks the law should focus on making people better citizens. Sara thinks that's a terrible idea because it gives the government too much power to decide what 'good' means, which is worse than just protecting individual rights.

Reasoning: Glen argues the law's primary goal should be to foster virtue to prevent social indifference, while Sara argues that letting government define virtue is more dangerous than overprotecting individual rights.

Analysis: To find the point at issue, we apply the 'Agree/Disagree' test. Glen explicitly says the law's primary role *should* be to create virtuous citizens. Sara's response indicates she believes this specific role is dangerous and undesirable compared to the alternative. They are fundamentally at odds over the proper objective of the legal system. Look for an answer that asks whether the law should be primarily concerned with promoting virtue.