Sentences with phrase «many arguments are made»

Despite the fact that he's milked #BloggerGate for all its worth, Dublin hotel and café owner Paul Stenson doesn't want the argument he's making about the entitled behavior of influencers to come at the expense of the woman who prompted it.

Trump's latest comments appeared to undermine the argument being made by Cohen lawyers, who say their client was Trump's personal attorney first and foremost, and therefore, practically everything Cohen did was protected by attorney - client privilege.

A similar argument was made Friday by Tom Lee, the cofounder and chief strategist at Fundstrat.

This argument is made as one separate from the double taxation argument, and federal system argument.

Many of the same arguments are made in favour of solar power — I hear this every time when I criticize Ontario for paying 80c / kWh for solar power.

There are arguments being made against Bitcoin now, about why it may not be the digital currency to last.

In much of the literature on leadership, an argument is made that to lead, one must follow.

The same argument was made when african americans started playing white student in sports.

Same arguments were made over desegregation AND letting women serve.

That is because the argument I'm making at his point in time is not for Christianity, but rather for the existence of the supernatural and the existence of God.

You said, «It's like you change things or make things up as you go along to suit the argument you're making at the time.»

(If that sounds familiar, it's because the same argument was made twenty - five years ago in the early stages of the battle over legalized abortion.)

It's like you change things or make things up as you go along to suit the argument you're making at the time.

@ Steven: the same sorts of arguments were made about the inherent goodness of man in the late 19th & early 20th century.

Barack Obama is a Natural for the Catholic Vote» I can't quite follow the argument he's making; I'm not even sure if there is an argument.

@Liz — It seems like the argument you are making is valid but only from the perspective of either creating a high risk of complication / retardation which science has proven when children are born to closely related people, and the «Ick» factor of not wanting to imagine two siblings getting it on.

The argument is made that when inclusive language is conspicuous it bears witness to the sin of sexism.

a) instead of * agreeing * that there are no contradictions, see if you can actually understand the argument being made (in this case: that there are NOT contradictions — especially since that is a widely held opinion of those on the opposite end of this debate).

As for the claim that if one simply waits long enough with an open heart, God will reveal Himself — that same argument is made by just about every religion.

The argument was made according to a classic liberationist reading of the scriptural mandate.

I had no answers for the arguments he was making.

The program's success mirrors the argument being made here — namely, as Leonard Saxe's research has shown, students who go on the ten - day trip do so primarily because it promises a meaningful and enjoyable Jewish experience.

Your argument is making a case for intelligent design.

The same arguments were made about interracial couples.

@godfreenow In logic, an argument is made when a claim is supported by a set of premises, which both support the other one.

That the arguments being made by the Jews to exclude the Gentiles are the same arguments being used to exclude same - sex couples from the life of the church.

I have a strong disliking for the argument being made about social priveliges with being male when It is made in response to concerns raised about mistreatment of men by woman.

The less politic version of the argument was made by a Marco Rubio aide from behind closed doors.

But couldn't similar arguments be made against some forms of Christianity?

However, if the argument is made that alternative orientation is nature's response to overpopulation, then 1) we'd need to see results from that, and 2) those results would point to either an increase or decrease.

It's sad when contemporary arguments are made over interpretations of what some guy said 150 years ago vs. what some other guys may have said a couple thousand years ago.

They were arguments that resulted in sensibilities and ways of thinking that were not there before the arguments were made, and that, it seems to me, counts as creativity.

What is NOT scholastically sound for a book like «Evidence that Demands a Verdict» is their not checking secondary sources — especially when the validity of the citations are critical to the argument being made.

A classic statement of such arguments was made by Thomas Aquinas.

Still, I see the argument you're making, and for what it's worth, I ran the numbers on some variations in names for 2009.

He seldom discusses a figure for no reason, but each philosopher, artist, and historical figure he examines becomes integral to the argument he is making.

Yes, if you died somewhere there would be remains, if you didn't, there wouldn't be, doesn't really add to any argument you're making.

That's a rather hypocritical argument you're making here.

It's not clear what you've demonstrated here other than a lack of knowledge and a lack of understanding about how arguments are made.

Here enters the second caveat about the rule that public arguments be made in a way that is publicly accessible.

These major lines of argument are what is gratifying about the book; the frustration occurs in the ways the arguments are made.

Similar arguments were made against interracial marriage.

The same argument was made against interracial marriage.

This argument was made in criticism of Newbigin (1983) and is relevant to Newbigin (1986), who emphasizes Christian religion as dogma which confronts culture to change it but is not itself changed by that culture.

His comment could easily be deconstructed and a reasonable argument being made for that being false.

The argument is made that in both instances religion is a threat to secular democracy» with the adjective «secular» inseparable from «democracy.»

When campaigning against whaling gained momentum in the late 1970's, similar arguments were made in its defence that we now hear in support of live export: jobs depended on it; whaling underpinned regional economies; and what would local communities do instead?

Pretty daft argument you're making as Wenger refused point blank to buy anything.

I've also seen arguments being made that despite his playing position being in jeopardy, perhaps he should be kept on to use his knowledge and experience on the game, in a leadership role as club captain.

If the argument is to be made that Kansas is a 1 seed (not an argument I am making) and MSU is not with 4 games in the L column and the 81st SOS, the math would seem to dictate that moving down SOS 25 slots = at least one loss.