Sentences with phrase «argument on both sides in»

There is room for argument on both sides in these kinds of cases.

Not exact matches

Napster co-founder Sean Parker's proposal to sell first - run movies to home viewers at $ 50 a pop has stirred up various corners of Hollywood, with big movie studios and theater chains up in arms over the Screening Room idea while multiple major filmmakers have landed on opposing sides of the argument.

A person close to the government's side told Reuters that the Justice Department does not intend to press the argument that it could seize the company's code, and someone on Apple's side said the company isn't worried enough to counter the veiled threat in its brief due Tuesday.

On the lighter side, we attempt to answer one endless fan argument: How would the stars of the past fare in the NHL of today?

Both sides in the Texas cases proposed on June 24 that oral arguments be heard in mid - to late - October.

Using Pakistan as a case study, this article analyzes the ongoing debate and concludes that while there is merit to arguments on both sides, prudent policy recommendations for the governance of the United States» covert drone program fall somewhere in between.

«I believe it is a matter of fundamental fairness that the American people be allowed to see both sides of the argument and make their own judgment,» Schumer wrote in a letter to the president released on Sunday.

Those are definitely fair arguments that could play a huge role if oliceridine doesn't clearly differentiate itself from morphine in both of these trials — and underscore why investors may want to keep any position on the small side for the time being.

The argument asking weather Islam is or can be a tolerant religion where people of this faith can live side by side with Christians, Jews, Hindu's and other religions co-exist in America is on the minds of most Americans.

Regarding the Confederacy, I recently wrote a book on the last major initiative in 1861 to avert the Civil War — the Washington Peace Conference — where both sides extensively made their arguments.

The BBC's online article, and the brief accompanying video that was presumably aired on the network, were both a bit sketchy in their account of the arguments made by the two sides.

He would bring in the lawyers on opposite sides of the argument over religious establishment and the question of driving religion from the public square.

Especially when we have since seen that these controversies have resulted in a litany of violence, hatred, and even killing on both sides of the argument.

It is a child, not a fetus and we can all yell at each other in the face until we are blue... well I can't... but arguments on both sides are just too ingrained.

I understand that there are strong arguments on both sides concerning Christians in the service so it is something I may not ever be able to fully understand or reconcile with.

It is commonly noted that in any argument the side that determines the terms of debate is already well on the road to victory.

(Experts on both sides present sophisticated jurisprudential arguments in defense of their positions, but most people look more to congenial outcomes than to consistent principles of law.)

In the years ahead, much will hang on which side of that argument has a greater portion of the truth.

The argument is particularly devastating today, for it is addressed precisely to the deprived, to workers, to those who live in underdeveloped countries (who are in even worse case than the besieged in Jerusalem), and it is true enough on its negative side.

It must be said at once that he has one decisive argument on his side: that it is a phrase unique in Judaism, where Amen signifies assent to something said, or links one to a prayer, but never introduces sayings, and that the developing Christian tradition tends to modify it to something much less startling.

Earlier writers had recognized that Volkmar went too far in his attempted demonstration of Mark's dependence upon Paul — he found evidence of such dependence on almost every page of the Gospel — but his view was such a welcome relief from the one - sided Tübingen theory, according to which Mark was a «neutral» in the great apostolic controversy over Jewish Christianity, that the main thesis of Volkmar was accepted without careful scrutiny of his supporting arguments.

Peter Abelard's seminal work, Sic et non, which quoted Church Fathers on both sides of a series of theological questions, set the tone for the Questions genre of the Middle Ages, The writer set out a Question, stated the best arguments on both sides (thesis and antitheses), made a determination (synthesis), and then rebutted each of the antitheses in detail.

I'm not going to interject into the lengthy argument here, but I want to comment on David» comment:» it is becoming more and more evident that there are those who are victims and support the right of victims to be heard and believed, and then there's the side of those who victimize and their supporters.There seems to be no grey area in between.»

Afraid of being branded as moralists, or even worse, proselytizers, politicians cling to surface arguments that remain in the public's comfort zone, choosing sides in the familiar debates on school prayer, pornography, media immorality and abortion.

I'm saying that there is prejudice in the written word, when that word is written by someone clearly on one side or another of an argument.

But what I detect in it is the work of someone who was never all that interested in investigating the arguments on either side of the same - sex marriage debate; whose scant interest in it has now been fully exhausted, both intellectually and morally; and whose present conclusions hover in mid-air without anything to support them other than a wistful regret that he has lost a hoedown partner in a gay man who has come fairly unglued over the issue.

Our objection would be that the Catholic side of the argument in section 3, on marriage and family life, is woefully inadequate, and that the non-Catholic side is presented with unacknowledged quasi-relativist assumptions which are profoundly opposed to Catholic thinking and formation.

It is useful to have those articles collected in book form to enable a thoughtful examination of the arguments on both sides.

While the recent form of the Under - 21s side might be a strong argument against that with a group of talented young players on show, the point he makes about the Italian, Spanish and French leagues providing an obvious spine of homegrown players in their respective All - Star teams is true.

There is a level of venom in some of these comments and didactic, and even perhaps patronizing tone (probably on both sides of the argument).

of course no team wants to lose but I can guarantee you that the reaction by the Chelski fans after today's results are nowhere near what would have occurred if we shit the bed on opening day... the difference is they have tasted EPL success on more than one occasion recently, they have won the Champions League and they have done it with 3 different managers in the last 12 years with a similar, if not smaller, wage bill than us... in comparison, we have been experiencing our own personal Groundhog Day with nothing to show for it but a few silvery trinkets that would barely wet the appetite of a world - class club... so it's time for Wenger to stop gloating over our week one escape act and make some substantial moves before this window closes or I fear that things will take a horrible turn when the inevitable happens... living on a knife's edge is no way to go through a full season of football and regardless of what side of the argument you fall on, you could feel high levels of toxicity in the air and that was friggin week one... I would much rather someone tried their best and failed, than took half - measures and hoped for the best

But, on the other side of the argument is the fact that he certainly has nothing else to prove in Serie A after winning the title in all three seasons he has been at Juventus.

our managers stubborness and reluctance to spend seems to have our fans split right down the middle... i genuinely believe its not the fact that he thinks the squad is good enough its more that hes trying to prove that you do nt need to buy success and by god if it takes him 10 years for this bunch to mature enough to do it hel keep us suffering so he can turn and say «told ya so» to fergie, rafa, hughes, abramovich, etc.the problem is by the time this happens theyl have won titles by spending the question is are all you fans on the other side of the argument willing to wait that long and watch cesc, RvP, arshavin, cliche etc go elsewhere for momentos of their careers.in the time since our last league triumph (also last serious challenge) the team that has won the league most has invested in berbatov, nani, evra, vidic, carrick, hargreaves, anderson, tevez to name a few....

With Alexis on the other side getting too involved in the midfield and not stretching play (and there's an argument his role should be adjusted, to try and get behind more), Arsenal only get width from their full - backs, which in turn, leaves Santi Cazorla and Francis Coquelin a lot of covering to do.

On the other side of the argument, there are specialists who are maintaining recent direct studies have been done that show once babies are born they have the innate ability to recognize their mothers» voices and may respond to familiar music that was played during the time they were in the womb.

I've been on both sides of both arguments: As a journalist, I agree that the writer participated in blogger generalizing.

In the debate over breastfeeding versus formula or bottle feeding, there are good arguments on both sides.

The connection with negative attributes (and hence its pejorative use) like demagoguery, racism, nativism and so on is a rhetorical device used by those on the other side of the argument (that would be the anti-Trump movement in the US and the «remainers» in the UK).

But no matter which side of this argument you're on, the fact that there are sides to be taken is proof that the concept has two definitions in America.

My basic argument is we should be trying to find a way of accommodating public concern over migration and to do it while remaining in the European Union... I still believe with a little bit of pragmatism on both sides it would be possible to reach [an agreement].»

(i) There is no «wasted vote» argument and no «don't let X party in» argument, and none of those silly bar charts on any side.

Then again, I find BOTH sides of this argument to be illigical idiots from the ground up, by somehow blythely assuming as axiom that the government owes ANYONE (straight or gay) different treatment based on nothing more than an agent of government having previously given them a paper statement that these two are now in a special relationship.

He is of course right to suggest that their position puts then firmly on the wrong side of the argument and interestingly suggests that on this particular matter, and welfare reform in general the public are ahead of the politicians.

With New Yorkers set to vote on a referendum that would expand casino gambling in New York state, people are speaking out on all sides of the argument.

The Brooklyn councilman rejected Cuomo's argument that the polls prove New Yorkers are on his side, noting: «The majority of the people in the state don't even vote; that 77 percent approval rating is bogus.»

Whichever side of the argument people ended on, the smoking ban opened the doors to further changes in legislation.

The prime minister has already said that he will allow ministers to campaign on either side of the argument - but only once he has finalised his renegotiation and announced the date of the in - out referendum.

There were heated arguments on the floor of Parliament today [Friday], from both sides of the chamber over a motion filed by the Minority Chief Whip, Muntaka Mubarak, for a special committee to be set up to investigate claims that the Trade Ministry extorted between $ 25,000 and $ 100,000 from expatriates to allow them sit close to the President during the Ghana Expatriates Business Awards held in the country.

Over the next few months this country is going to debate the merits of leaving or remaining in the European Union, and I have many colleagues whom I respect greatly on both sides of this argument.

Kahn, a former state Supreme Court justice who was appointed a federal judge in 1996, recently instructed both sides to stop filing legal arguments, saying he has enough information to decide the key pre-trial issues on injury and diminution of property values.