Sentences with phrase «church argued against them»

For over a hundred years the Church argued against them.

Or even when the Church argues against contraceptive use by Catholics, as that is effectively arguing for overpopulation.

Not exact matches

It amazes me that many on the left cry out about separation of church and state when arguing against prayer in school or the words in god we trust on money.

Unfortunately, this is the kind of thing Satan loves, obviously from Martin's comments because it gives haters and ignorant people ammunition to argue against God and church.

Just out of curiosity, back when you were «one of the champions in the church proudly speaking out against the threat of the homosexual offenders» what were the reasons you used to argue for that position?

He would be more out of line with the Bible if he was arguing against slave ownership or for allowing women inside the church.

Fourthly, if we subscribe to the notion that there is no separation regarding work (viewed as worship — Col 3:17, 23 - 24; Rom 12:1) in the church and the marketplace, why shouldn't Christians (who argue against receiving God's provision in the form of a salary) just «trust God», and reject their employers» salary structure?

If you have arguments against the philosophy of the Church or the dogma of the religion, I can respect the difference and argue the points.

Many of them have been raised in a church culture that often perpetuates, ignores or argues against the existence of racism.

In this book I argue against the use of visionary thinking in the church and how it destroys authentic community.

Bennett pointed out in his letter that Goldwater omitted an important adjective in that quote, for he had actually argued that the church should not be engaged in «a holy war» against communism.»

A professor of ethics at Loyola University, New Orleans, argues against the moral legitimacy of the death penalty, in agreement with statements of John Paul II that have been incorporated into the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

It is against this background that our countryman, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, has rightly argued that the church has to be concerned about the secular things such as politics and economics, education, medical aid, the rent and housing, food prices et cetera.

«Neither Peter in his work to include Gentiles in the church nor the abolitionists in their campaign against slavery argued that their experience should take precedence over Scripture,» writes Matthew.

Advocates of this view would argue that the local bishop needs a heightened autonomy over and against the norms of the universal Church.

If depersonalization turns out to be the greatest single threat in the future, it can be strongly argued that the church has the special role of warning about this and safe - guarding the personal dimension against encroachment in the name of efficiency, progress, or technological necessity.

That hardly argues against incorporating classical styles in many church settings, but instead cautions us that riding each successive wave of fashion may be neither desirable nor even possible.

Catholic citizens have every reason — including the truth of the matter — to argue that our Constitution is much more democratic that our Court now says it is, just as they have every reason to argue that our Framers never meant «liberty» to be used as a wrecking ball deployed against our indispensable relational «intermediary» institutions — beginning with the family and the church.

Even if an uncritical relationship between the church and science does not totally ideologize Christianity, we still have history's word that the ambiguous nature of many scientific achievements argues against the church's unqualified sponsorship of them.

One prominent legal commentator has argued that the case against the church, to force it to perform same - sex religious marriage, is «reasonable»; another has claimed that the church's argument is hysterical.

The Catholic Church has argued that the 90 - day requirement is biased since current law gives an adult who was abused as a child up to the age of 23 to bring a lawsuit against religious organizations, the Boy Scouts and other private and nonprofit institutions.

The Catholic Conference and other critics of The Child Victims Act have argued the look - back window would lead to a torrent of frivolous claims against the church and other defendants.

Arguing the opposite case is the formidable South Australian Crown Prosecutor, Roderic Chamberlain (Charles Dance), but O'Sullivan soon learns that he is also pitted against the closed ranks of the constabulary, the judiciary, the State, and even the Catholic church, all as outraged that so much fuss should be made about the fate of a black man as they are desperate to stave off any undermining of their own authority.

If Goldacre really wants to stick his neck out, why doesn't he try arguing against a rich, powerful, bullying Climate - Change establishment which includes all three British main political parties, the National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Society, the Prince of Wales, the Prime Minister, the President of the USA, the EU, the UN, most schools and universities, the BBC, most of the print media, the Australian Government, the New Zealand Government, CNBC, ABC, the New York Times, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, most of the rest of the City, the wind farm industry, all the Big Oil companies, any number of rich charitable foundations, the Church of England and so on?

Mike Fox describes a 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision upholding Costco's dress code: The court upheld «Costco's dress policy against a challenge by an employee who argued her right to wear her eyebrow piercing was required by her religious beliefs as a member of the Church of Body Modification.»