Sentences with phrase «clear argument against yours»

Separation of church and state is a clear argument against yours.

Not exact matches

In a more recent work, Reason in the Balance: The Case Against NATURALISM in Science, Law and Education (P. 3), Johnson continues his argument, and makes clear what was implicit in the earlier work.

Because of them, I have a clearer understanding of why Atheists have such strong arguments against «faith» in God's existence.

As should be clear from the foregoing account, Griffin's argument against the standard view of omnipotence rests on the claim that Premise X is in some way deficient.

I have yet to get a clear, cogent argument from logicians against this view.

He develops his argument against atypically atheistic Darwinism around the fact of evolutionary convergence: «The central point is that because organisms arrive repeatedly at the same biological solution... this provides not only a degree of predictability, but more intriguingly points to a deeper structure to life...» His viewpoint is quite clear: «Metric - sized animals that are the end - result of many billions of years of prior stellar and biological evolution may be the only way to allow at least one species to begin its encounter with God.

The arguments against it are clear, the perils of it obvious.

There are lots of arguments for and against, and there is still no clear opinion.

In theory, he is here to ceremonially sign a bill that would allow union members to deduct their union dues from their state taxes, but it's clear what he is really doing today is waging a bigger argument against President Donald Trump.

Accepting the failures of his leadership as his alone against a tide of media hostility and so on, and not of his message and policies — not a wholly implausible argument for those inclined to believe — would give the left's next candidate a much clearer run, a sympathetic hearing and a wave of righteous indignation to ride.

seriously though, skip - every argument of yours has failed - religious views that gays are perverted and sinful (and yes, vast majority against gay equality are religious minded) has no place in a secular govt DADT repeal was favored in the public by almost 68 % - if voted on, pretty clear the public was approving of gay equality in the military

His argument against science funding (and science in general) seems to follow arguments made by other prominent Trump transition team figures: because science is sometimes wrong, or not clear cut, it shouldn't be trusted.

They come up with clear and specific arguments in support or against a view.

Instead of trying to create a pointless and invalid argument against it, they simply aim to clear up some of the misconceptions surrounding it as the term «addiction» gets thrown around too loosely these days by people who don't actually know what it means.

There have been clear voices against advocacy however, particularly in relation to the climate community, often centring around arguments of bias, impartiality, and ethics that suggest it is problematic for scientists to express views beyond communicating their science.

The palaeo climate record is an important part of the skeptic argument against climate alarmism, specifically the absence of clear evidence of CO2 causation of warming and regulation of or correlation with temperature on all time scales.

I probably have a certain amount of bias here because at the time I was absorbing the contents of the debate / discussion raging at CA and tAV and it seemed pretty clear that the arguments against the S09 method were strong and easily understood and the arguments against were weak misdirection.

It considers arguments for and against such the imposition of such a territorial limit on public interest justifications and, through analysis of the case law, concludes that the Court of Justice is yet to adopt a clear and concise approach.

Because these were all tossed at the very early stages, there wasn't much development of the arguments for or against polygamy, though it was clear that everyone was basically talking about an extension of Obergefell's recognition that «the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person.»

«It is becoming increasingly clear that any argument against shared parenting is not based on empirical data.

The Competition Act has an extensive section on Price Maintenance which, in part, protects against the discrimination of suppliers due to any ``,,, low price policy...», As we get deeper and deeper into the realm of discount real estate services, it becomes all the more in the public interest, that we're absolutely clear regarding what we can say and can't say to defend our respective value arguments.