Sentences with phrase «about the liberty of»

The real issue is about the liberty of a man or a company to say or assume a position it considers to be of worth and to say it out loud for everyone to hear.

Not exact matches

I don't want public attention because I don't want the story to be about me... I want it to be about what the US government is doing... I'm willing to sacrifice all of that because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building.

But had Sony stuck to its guns and released the movie as planned, it would have made a strong statement about standing up for freedom instead of giving in to fear and threats as Ben Franklin once wrote, «Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.»

They mumbled something more about person of interest, not at liberty to disclose, etc..

«That was honest - to - God college beer money that I gave up to be associated with Cato, so you know about my commitment to the cause of liberty,» he said during a forum at the think tank last year.

Noticed @waynelapierrejr that when you mentioned the Declaration of Independence, you talked a lot about liberties and the pursuit of happiness - but never about Life.

child porn, to use a popular boogeyman of censors and civil liberties activists complaining about censors alike), and then expand the apparatus over time until eventually it gets into the hands of some enterprising young hotshots that promptly decide they can make a few billion dollars through the cryptoeconomic equivalent of LIBOR manipulation.

This is a unique opportunity for local and regional participants to obtain the necessary level of knowledge about the ideas of liberty.

There is a certain about of liberties that servicemen and women give up to serve.

He's a Thomist in terms of «epistemology,» which means that he believes that we're, by nature, all about both economic liberty and the truth about the personal, relational God.

It's quite hard to strike the right balance in our distant appreciation of the state, but Locke would likely suggest that it's a sign of poor breeding and inadequate education to complain too vociferously about the constraints on ourselves and others necessary to preserve our liberty.

Lots of well meaning Tea Party folks talk about taking the country back, worry about losing freedom, and want to restore liberty.

I have a peculiar framework for thinking about the American idea of liberty, which I first developed for a class, but which I'm now hoping to develop into a book.

Mary Ann Glendon asks us to consider «what a set of legal arrangements that places individual liberty or mere lifestyle over innocent life says about, and may do to, the people and the society that produces them.»

So alongside my rock songbook, I'm inaugurating here a new series about the American idea of liberty.

(And since we are entering an era in which conservatives may be forced into considering, at all levels of government, the use of more dramatically intransigent constitutional resistance options to various budget - destroying, Constitution - eroding, and religious - liberty threatening trends of liberal «governance,» a Lincoln - like precision about what we intend to do, and about what enormities we are constitutionally obliged to put up with, is all the more necessary.

Henceforth, the right to abort was to be understood as a liberty interest under the Due Process Clause, which included (so the plurality opinion of the Supreme Court said) «the right to define one's own concept of existence and to make the most basic decisions about bodily integrity.»

These, I suggest, are the essentials around which we can unite, and beyond which we must grant liberty for differing opinions about issues relating to the future of Israel, the chronology of the end times, the nature of the priesthood, the practice of the gifts of the Spirit, church governance or even (dare I say it?)

They should pick some lead from western nation about secularism, freedom of speech and liberty and manage their affairs in those terms with believers and nonbelievers equally.

* My point, again, as I understand it in terms of our 1st amendment, and freedom of speech, was to (build in) a «wall» of separation of church and government... (because) of «Christianity,» since you are talking about our country, so as not to have - anyone's freedom of speech and their civil liberties trampled on.

about gas lines justifying DoE, one of our founding fathers said «those who would give up essential liberty for a little temporary security deserve neither».

Lochner bothers me more for this, and for what it implies about a further way of pushing the theory of liberty even further, the personal autonomy way, than for its prevention of particular economic policies.

Their worlds are characterized by powerlessness, and so they seek not a meaningful word about God, but a powerful word from God — not to give God a place in their world but, on the contrary, to overcome their world and bring them into God's world, a new world of justice and liberty.

George Will argues that American politics is divided between conservatives, «who take their bearings from the individual's right to a capacious, indeed indefinite, realm of freedom» and progressives «whose fundamental value is the right of the majority to have its way in making rules about which specified liberties shall be respected.»

You would think it would be a hard sell given the fact that the real estate mogul and reality star has boasted about his extramarital affairs, profited off casinos and strip clubs, said he doesn't need to ask God for forgiveness, called for targeting innocent civilians in war, mocked a reporter with a disability, threatened the religious liberty of minority groups in the U.S., and gained wide support among white nationalists for consistently lying about and demeaning blacks, Mexican immigrants, Muslims, and Syrian refugees.

The technically nonpartisan nature of the Church's religious liberty campaign was further drowned out by a small chorus of strident bishops who left no doubt about how Catholics ought to vote for president.

Forcing the case for this kind of living moral alternative into the narrow confines of an argument that is just about religion and liberty makes the treasure we seek to protect seem smaller and less significant than it truly is.

Indeed, his commitment to religious liberty was at least as much a function of his worry about domineering religious sects imposing themselves on the public square as of any concern about a loss of society's fundamental moral character.

But there is a reason to remain vigilant about religious liberty, including something as simple as speaking out about the denial of such a right.

The state of New York recognized, in the landmark religious liberty case People v. Phillips (1813), that compelling a priest to testify about matters heard during confession would be a fundamental violation of Catholics» religious liberty:

And again, while there is a lot of freedom and liberty here, we are talking about keeping it Scriptural, and so I have found that by far, the best thing I can do is use Scripture.

America is the only country that is founded on a proposition, on a proposition about rights and liberties, not only of Americans but of all people.

And we have much to brag about in this regard, not least a First Amendment that guarantees religious liberty and the separation of church and state.

On judgment day, I don't want to try to rationalize why I voted for a cult member who caused souls to be damned, by feebly explaining that I was more concerned about repealing Obamacare, preventing a redistribution of wealth, preventing abortion (those lives are in heaven), preventing gay marriage, and restoring individual liberties.

... We understand that people of good faith can disagree about the relationship between religious liberty and anti-discrimination laws in our country, and how that relationship should best be structured.

It is hard to say why clergy from theologically conservative denominations do not preach more about sanctity - of - life issues or religious liberty.

Only 40 percent of respondents stated that clergy had spoken about religious liberty.

«Religious liberty would come about only if Christianity were victorious in a global war of religions.»

There is a great deal of justified worry about how the advance of gay rights will harm religious liberty.

After the happy honeymoon she will receive for living down to a cheesey Christian conversion stereotype, she is going to find some ugly things about how Catholics respond to her «questions (about) certain aspects of Catholicism, including the church's positions on homosexuality, contraception and some aspects of religious liberty.»

This is not to say that we can not come to impassioned, principled positions about how to vote, particularly when dealing with issues as important as sexual assault, bigotry, racism, responsible foreign policy, religious liberty, and the dignity of human life at every stage in its development.

Christian liberty implies that reasonable and faithful Christians will disagree about issues situated farther away from the core of biblical teaching.

That's why the discussion about becoming all things to all people is almost unintelligible without its context: the logic of the argument is derived from Paul's understanding of gospel liberty.

But beyond all of its memorable visuals, huge set pieces and bold creative choices (it's four hours long and takes some liberties with the text), The Ten Commandments is at its core a compelling story about a man's calling from God and his struggles with his own humanity.

These local norms and beliefs would afford a different experience of liberty, one about which liberalism has been silent, one that stresses self - governance and self - limitation achieved primarily through the cultivation of practices and virtues.

Unlike Francis, these bishops over-emphasize abortion, advocate bigotry under the guise of «religious liberty,» and care more about political battles than the care of souls.

That's the future of the debate about religious liberty in America.

Similarly, I have growing concerns about the steady expansiveness of the security state and the corresponding erosion of personal liberties.

We're not at liberty to change what the Bible says about the morality of gay sex.

Plus, talking up religious liberty is likely less of a turnoff for moderate voters than is talk about bans on abortion and gay marriage, traditionally the top concerns of religious conservatives.