Sentences with phrase «arguments on both sides by»

Not exact matches

It means deciding what one believes not by conforming to fashionable opinions, but by taking the trouble to learn and honestly consider the strongest arguments to be advanced on both or all sides of questions — including arguments for positions that others revile and want to stigmatize and against positions others seek to immunize from critical scrutiny.»

This article looks at both sides of the argument by presenting the facts on how the amount of Social Security benefits you'll receive can change depending on the age that you claim them.

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.

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.

So, «the deed» argument is one that can easily be trotted out by folk on opposite sides of the fence.

I see it as my duty to entertain and mock the absurdi.ties posted by both sides of the argument, though more often than not absurdi.ties fall on the religious side of the line.

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.

What Ryan Anderson is «peddling» is an argument, supported by evidence, that makes people on the other side squirm.

Those controversies ought to be left open by a theological school so that the structure and merits of arguments on both sides can be rigorously tested.

On a side note: To everyone who asked about Pascal's Wager, you could've answered your own question by Googling «Pascal's Wager,» going to the first link (Wikipedia), and reading the article:) That's the case with a lot of Christian «arguments for god.»

On the far side of the older argument over the compatibility of Catholicism and democracy, this book seeks to convince us that the principles and practices of the free society are made necessary by Catholic teaching.

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

They can't win the football argument by getting people on their side so they blatantly lie.

On Tuesday night, two of the Premier League's Uniteds, Manchester and Newcastle, came together to gift the country something really quite special: A six - goal humdinger dotted with penalties, seasoned with snark, littered with defensive incoherence, and containing not one, but two blown leads by the red side of the argument, who really should know better.

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....

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).

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.

The final argument on the merits may be made by two persons on each side.

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...

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.

On June 29, 2006, a U.S. District Judge ordered both sides to submit proposed maps by July 14, respond to their opponents» maps by July 21, and be prepared to hold oral arguments on August On June 29, 2006, a U.S. District Judge ordered both sides to submit proposed maps by July 14, respond to their opponents» maps by July 21, and be prepared to hold oral arguments on August on August 3.

During the referendum campaign, May infuriated senior Conservative colleagues on the remain side by largely staying out of the day - to - day arguments in favour of staying in the EU.

A town hall held by state Sen. Jose Peralta (D - East Elmhurst) on the bill to bring livery cabs that can be hailed to the outer boroughs erupted into impassioned statements and heated arguments, mostly in Spanish, from industry members on separate sides of the plan.

Hundreds of documents have now been filed by both sides, and after hearing these oral arguments on key points of contention, the judges are expected to make a ruling that could divide the intellectual property, give it all to one side, or even decide that neither party deserves the patents.

The arguments surrounding global warming have become so polarised that in my opinion there is no longer a genuine attempt to get to the truth through orignial research, but simply a process of point scoring by either side going on.

On the reasoning side, I'm seeing good arguments on both sides, but find I'm swayed overall more by Dr. Shanahan - though my mind is broadened and better for it by reading the other sidOn the reasoning side, I'm seeing good arguments on both sides, but find I'm swayed overall more by Dr. Shanahan - though my mind is broadened and better for it by reading the other sidon both sides, but find I'm swayed overall more by Dr. Shanahan - though my mind is broadened and better for it by reading the other side.

At first, start the writing by choosing a right topic and after selecting a topic, you need to provide solid information to support your own point of views on this matter and be prepared for any argument that you may receive from the opposite side.

Most, on both sides of the argument, agree that at this point in time, for the ERA to be passed into law it would require re-ratification by the states, as the original 7 - year period has long expired.

This article looks at both sides of the argument by presenting the facts on how the amount of Social Security benefits you'll receive can change depending on the age that you claim them.

The good news is that some local and state governments have understood these commonsense arguments (backed by reams of studies and statistics) and have avoided passing «feel - good» laws in favor of smart, targeted legislation that actually addresses problems and puts pet owners and animal control enforcement on the same side.

It's in that way that as childish as the argument is, there's a certain logic behind it all: With a belief that there must be a winner and a loser, it goes beyond not wanting to be on the losing side, but straight into the fact that by making your side lose, the opposition is thereby threatening the continued existence of that which you enjoy.

The role of the trickster was partly inspired by the Nigerian mythological god Edshu, recognizable by his hat that was colored red on one side and blue on the other, provoking confusion and argument amongst members of a community who would disagree on the color he was wearing.

One of the main advantages of science is that it can show disagreement (just remember the bet on black holes by Hawking and Kip Thorne) and be proud of it, as long as both sides are willing to give in on superior arguments and evidence.

One - sided arguments proliferate and people arguing the other side are frequently denounced as being employed by business interests rather than rebutted on the merits.

Or is Paul defending against the charge by making a numbers argument — the scientists in question are on the same side as the consensus, so to challenge any aspect of global warming science or politics is to make a statement about «the majority of scientists» (many of whom are in fact social scientists)?

Asked by a man attending the event whether he thought mankind was responsible for global warming, Christie says he's seen evidence on both sides of the argument but thinks it hasn't been proven one way or another.

Also, your premise has the problem as antecedent to a patently false claim, as the substantial argument on my side against the validity of your argument is not even separated from your claim of its nonexistence by two inches on the page.

«I've seen Al Gore's film twice, but I've also read Michael Crichton's State of Fear, which makes a compelling case on the other side,» says Hug, referring to the controversial 2004 novel in which Crichton — using scientific arguments that were hotly challenged by critics — ridiculed the global - warming consensus as the work of conspiratorial alarmists.

Given that people on Brulle's side of the Global Warming / Climate Change argument have been making false claims for decades — for example, that New York and Washington would be under water by the year 20004 — and given that the mass media sound daily alarms about the climate threat, the statement in the National Research Council report that «some» information sources are «affected» by campaigns opposed to policies that would limit carbon dioxide emissions is scant foundation for believing a massive conspiracy exists.5

This is the argument that has been put by some on the other side of the issue.

But arguments over the precise value of climate sensitivity duck the wider point, which is that even if we're lucky and climate sensitivity is on the low side of scientists» estimates, we're still heading for a substantial level of warming by the end of the century if greenhouse gas emissions aren't addressed, as the IPCC has highlighted.

Jan P Perlw1tz There is some lack of honesty on your side, if you make some innuendo with respect to statements by me, but refuse to substantiate and to be specific, and so leaving me without any chance to examine the validity of your hidden argument.

Probably a lot of GRRRR on both sides of the argument by now with actual root causes lost in the history and he said she said crap.

I am beginning to suspect that climatology is going to undergo a very serious degradation in the perception of it's value and predictive abilities, mostly because of the character of arguments offered by ss and others of similar ilk on both sides of this issue.

Unfortunately Mr Delingpole many people don't appreciate that just because you have a lot to say on the subject that you don't necessarily know anymore than anyone else, and a blog on the web is really not the best way to get the facts on the subject (by those on either side of the argument).

You will then be able to concentrate on the more serious arguments by the more sensible critics of the IPCC (and there are some from both sides, ie, critics who think the IPCC overestimates potential warming and / or potential harm; and critics who think the IPCC underestimates potential warming and / or potential harm).

If those who oppose wind power have the truth on their side, why do they have to resort to fallacious arguments, twisted truths, misinterpreted facts, misinterpreted data, anonymous reports, and analyses by maverick amateurs to support their case?

Attribution outlines in IPCC WG1 AR 5 SPM cover eighteen arguments, each one valid and backed by observations, and each one the simplest, most parsimonious of exception, most universal explanation for that data available; if anything, it errs on the side of least drama, and still remains stark and damning of current emission practices.

I know that because I have used it as an example to challenge Smokey to display some true skepticism by telling me what arguments on «HIS side» he is skeptical of.

Again, there are plenty of ignorant people on all sides but by going about this low rhetorical (and yes, ad hominem) tactic has only weakened your argument.