The key to this question is to notice the parallel use of verbs and the subordinate clauses that begin with "that." See the emphasized selection below, which uses boldface and underlining to show you these portions clearly:

"Hearme for my cause, andbe silent,thatyou may hear.Believeme for mine honor, andhave respectto mine honor,thatyou may believe.Censureme in your wisdom, andawakeyour senses,thatyou may the better judge."

In each of these sentences, Brutus uses two verbs in the imperative mood followed by an explanation of why they are to listen to the commands made by the verbs. This establishes the "rhythm" of the parallelism and makes these three sentences clearly related in structure.

Since the first two items in this sentence’s list begin with “in which,” the third must do the same. The verb should remain in the present tense, as the first two items do. (An alternate fix would be to eliminate “in which” from the second item in the list. This would make the first “in which” apply to all three parts of the list equally.)

While this sentence may appear correct at first glance, but consider the two things that are being compared: being opposed to marriage equality (a stance) and “any challenge to his rigid, traditionalist beliefs” (an opinion). To change this faulty parallelism, we simply need to add the correct subject and verb to the latter part of the sentence.

Here, the simplest solution is the best. Adding an “in” to “summer” makes each item in the list parallel (a noun preceded by a preposition). No change to the punctuation needs to be made in this case.

While this sentence sounds correct spoken aloud, it is missing an apostrophe. We don’t mean to compare the speaker’s love of the cottage with dogs; we mean to compare the speaker’s love with the dogs’ love. Thus, adding an apostrophe to “dogs” solves the faulty parallelism. (The choice “that of our dogs’” goes too far in making the dogs doubly possessive and is also clunky.)

The correct relationship between the two parts of these sentences is one of contrast. “Because” and “Seeing that” imply causation (i.e. pundits’ disbelief leads to experts’ agreement), which is not logical. “Not to mention” implies agreement or similarity.” “Meanwhile” correctly implies a sort of contrast, but it does not fit the grammatical construction of the sentence.

The relationship between “open communication” and “an active acceptance of imperfection” is one of agreement, so “in addition to” is the best choice. “In light of” incorrectly implies that the “open communication” is subordinate to “active acceptance,” and “in spite of” incorrectly implies contrast. “After all” and “especially” are both transitional phrases, but neither fits the grammatical construction of the sentence.

“Having high standards” and “accepting poor behavior” are directly opposed ideas, so we need a contrasting transition: “not.” “While also” suggests that the two ideas should coexist at the same time, but that is not logical in the context of the sentence. “As well as” and “moreover” incorrectly suggest addition. “Indeed” suggests emphasis and is both semantically and syntactically wrong.

梅雷迪思的不确定性正在与他形成鲜明对比r sneaking suspicion here, so a contrasting word or phrase will be necessary to properly express the meaning of the sentence. (The appearance of “instead” in the sentence is a further hint that we’re looking for a contrast word.) “In spite of” and “whereas” are contrast phrases, but they’re the wrong part of speech for the sentence. “But” is the best choice here.

Based on the content of this sentence, we need a transition that expresses a sentiment like “For this reason” or “therefore.” In other words, we need a conclusion word or phrase. “As such” is the only choice among these answers that provides conclusion.