As the ACLU et al put it, «the government is not the final
arbiter of truth with the power to foreclose further challenge» - the power to end debate.
Under the First Amendment, the government is not the final
arbiter of truth with the power to foreclose further challenge to its policies.
Not exact matches
Our goal is to reduce these hoaxes just like we fight other scams on our platform, but I want us to be especially careful about never being
arbiters of truth ourselves — which is why we're working
with third - party fact - checkers.
Among them were pantheism and the positions that human reason is the sole
arbiter of truth and falsehood and good and evil; that Christian faith contradicts reason; that Christ is a myth; that philosophy must be treated without reference to supernatural revelation; that every man is free to embrace the religion which, guided by the light
of reason, he believes to be true; that Protestantism is another form
of the Christian religion in which it is possible to be as pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church; that the civil power can determine the limits within which the Catholic Church may exercise authority; that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils have erred in defining matters
of faith and morals; that the Church does not have direct or indirect temporal power or the right to invoke force; that in a conflict between Church and State the civil law should prevail; that the civil power has the right to appoint and depose bishops; that the entire direction
of public schools in which the youth
of Christian states are educated must be by the civil power; that the Church should be separated from the State and the State from the Church; that moral laws do not need divine sanction; that it is permissible to rebel against legitimate princes; that a civil contract may among Christians constitute true marriage; that the Catholic religion should no longer be the religion
of the State to the exclusion
of all other forms
of worship; and «that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself to and agree
with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.»
On it, «subjective perception and experience become the sole
arbiter of truth,» as my colleague Sara Mead wrote, and «we are left
with the... forces
of emotion, sentiment, and affinity to guide our judgments and decisions.»
Yes, it is this «
arbiter of truth vs misinformation» thing that I have a problem
with.
The judge rarely, if ever, awards one spouse
with everything he or she wants and often awards the spouses
with what neither wants, since this
arbiter of truth can never know fully the intricacies
of your specific situation.
Along
with the post, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted his own thoughts on the issue, stating: «With any changes we make, we must fight to give all people a voice and resist the path of becoming arbiters of truth oursel
with the post, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg posted his own thoughts on the issue, stating: «
With any changes we make, we must fight to give all people a voice and resist the path of becoming arbiters of truth oursel
With any changes we make, we must fight to give all people a voice and resist the path
of becoming
arbiters of truth ourselves.