Sentences with phrase «debate questions like»

But apparently it's a country where good moral people can be manipulated by self - serving politicians into being distracted from the larger issues by high - school debate questions like «when does life begin» or «should gays marry,» or even «is being gay a choice.»

Not exact matches

Sure, at debates, like last night's great one in Milwaukee, candidates are always asked questions that begin with, «As president, will you...» but we all know that presidents alone can't really do anything but put their socks on or, in more recent years, play a lot of golf.

The ongoing debate about data and privacy is directly related to the question of encryption in some important ways, as Mossberg's tweet notes: messaging content is data that users would like to keep private, and encryption accomplishes that.

Leaders» debates — like the one last night — are all about what those asking the questions think is important.

I look forward to more occasions like this one where we can keep debating that question that resists facile answers, and can draw quite a crowd.

The debate over Calvinism is not so much about theology, but about this question: «What is God like?»

It is a question if the last two really belong to the controversy series: they are more like attacks upon the scribes than controversies with them, and the question of the Davidic sonship seems more like a debate within the church than a controversy with the scribes, though its form reminds us of number 8:

You say you don't know gods will because to try and think like god is too hard (which for the record I think is a cop out in any debate or discussion about god that I understand you really believe it and are not trying to duck around a question, but to say I don't know, god is too powerful to understand sort of halts discussion from there)

You say you don't know gods will because to try and think like god is too hard (which for the record I think is a cop out in any debate or discussion about god that I understand you really believe it and are not trying to duck around a question, but to say I don't know, god is too powerful to understand sort of halts discussion from there) but you also are saying to speak with him on a daily basis.

The question is answered, like most Jewish questions, with a debate.

And spectacles like last night's three - hour test of human willpower only underscore a big problem: Traditional news outlets have made presidential debates — arguably our country's most important televised forum and exchange of ideas — into mind - numbingly boring talk - a-thons, where a bunch of rich, powerful people needle each other for hours about past career decisions while dodging any question of substance.

«That performance was kind of like in Old School, when Will Ferrell answers the very difficult debate question, and everyone's like, «Wow, that was amazing,» and he's like, «Whoa, what happened?

There has already been a lot of debate about how much the Spaniard brings to the table for Arsenal and how much his absence has hurt the team and their efforts to claim a major trophy like the EPL title but another question connected with that is how much losing Cazorla affects the other main creative star in our side, Mesut Ozil.

Increasingly, debates on programmes like The Andrew Marr Show, Sky News and Question Time are shaping the political arguments, too.

As one of those working on this project, I would like to set out the questions it is raising, put the call out for responses and invite readers to attend the two public debates we are holding after our evidence - gathering phase, which runs until the end of March.

12:31 - James Arbuthnot (Con), the only MP with a surname which sounds like a drunk man trying to make a point, gets a question in on the defence reserves debate later.

11:55 - Theresa Villiers, who always looks like a ghost frightened of its own reflection, is just finishing up Northern Ireland questions, where they are debating issues of such substance it makes the rest of the UK's business seem flippant.

May I suggest that it would be much better to provide a whole week of Back - Bench business, so that all the matters that I am sure Government Members would like to debate, such as why the European Commission is demanding an increase of 7 % in its budget, and all the issues that Opposition Members would like to discuss, such as the double - dip recession, can be put not only to Ministers, but to the Prime Minister, who will be avoiding Prime Minister's questions for another two weeks?

Although floor debates in the main Commons chamber — and the rowdy weekly showcase of Prime Minister's Question Time — are the dominant images of the UK Parliament, like any legislature the House of Commons also does a lot of detailed work holding the government to account.

Assembly minority leader Brian Kolb, who like the Democrats in the Senate will drive the length of the floor debate with their questions, said he was betting the budget bills would not be completed before midnight.

So I think it gets to the question of context — formal debates, I like them.

Our track record on debating similar questions on Earth, like the use of genetically modified crops, is far from stellar.

At a tense debate in February at UCLA where Jacobson argued over the merits of supporting nuclear versus ramping up renewables, sharing the stage with nuclear supporters like Environmental Progress» Shellenberger and fellow Stanford climate scientist Ken Caldeira, the question - and - answer session with the audience devolved into a shouting match.

I'm with Elon Musk in thinking that fundamental questions like this need to be asked and the answers debated before we go too far down this road.

That question is not simply a matter for intellectual debate, as is evident in the controversy surrounding an issue like abortion, which is fundamentally a debate about when a fetus becomes a conscious person.

In future, such data may be key to figuring out whether groups of dogs form complex social hierarchies like wild wolves — a hotly debated question in animal psychology.

Derek did actually leave off some of that that I'm very proud of that I would like to mention, partly because I'm heard by the old giant, is that I founded an organization called Science Debate 2008 which was an organization which was trying to get the presidential candidates to have a debate on science; and we didn't succeed, we got it on to 14 of our member - synthesized quesDebate 2008 which was an organization which was trying to get the presidential candidates to have a debate on science; and we didn't succeed, we got it on to 14 of our member - synthesized quesdebate on science; and we didn't succeed, we got it on to 14 of our member - synthesized questions.

If you have any subjects you think I should tackle in one of my vlogs or a burning interiors question or debate you'd like my take on, do let me know — I always love hearing your ideas and suggestions.

These are actually some of my favorite posts to write because I feel like a lot of the reader questions that I get are questions that SO MANY of you want to ask... and often times, the reader questions spur some really interesting debate and further discussion and further questions, etc. etc. etc..

«London Has Fallen» wastes no time debating the justness of such a collateral damage - inflicting remote attack — thereby delivering a definitive answer to the drone - centric ethical question at the heart of next week's «Eye in the Sky» — because, like its»90s forbears, it embraces the hardline notion that there's a fundamental moral difference between the actions of America (and its allies) and its sadistic adversaries.

It's as simple as creating a group page for your class, having them «like» it, and posting questions for them to answer and debate.

Accordingly, some of us have tried to change the debate — actually just change the opening question to something like, «How do we continuously grow the number of students in high - performing schools?»

Although general knowledge questions that students learn in school form the foundation for most competitions, some, particularly those that are televised, also add sports, pop culture, and current event questions — something bemoaned on various nontelevised quiz tournament blogs, where coaches, players, and former players vigorously debate topics like moderating etiquette («Do not prompt answers!»)

«We knew they were interested in Snooze or Lose when we completed the presentation and, rather than ask us questions, they proceeded to debate amongst themselves the merits of a campaign, what a potential campaign could look like, and how to handle related issues, such as nutrition.»

Moreover, the use of phrases like «hundreds of studies show» makes it seem as though the question is closed, the debate over.

At the crux of the debate are questions about who gets to speak on behalf of racial minorities and low - income children, and what school accountability should look like in the age of Donald Drumpf.

Leaving aside the issue of whether it is even desirable to have any intervention in the market, such as Fannie and Freddie buying more mortgage loans, it seems like the debate has shifted to the question of encouraging moral hazard, something foreign to Alan Greenspan, who thought he could micromanage monetary policy.

In closing, as an aside, can you imagine a question given at the Presidential debates that went something like this: «Senator, the leading bond manager of our country, and many leading financial writers (e.g. James Grant, Barry Ritholtz) have argued that the way that the government calculates the CPI is flawed, and understates the change in the cost of living.

As a scientist, I think it is important to look at evidence on both sides of a debate before giving an answer to a question like this.

This question has been debated by pretty much everyone who likes a bit of virtual footie, and while FIFA has been arguably dominant for some years now, PES is starting to come out of the shadow of the giant EA franchise.

In The Question Bucket, we mull over how boring it can be to play a «bad» character in a video game, the ongoing debate over whether you can like a game when its creators are shitty, and more.

But what are the implications of a curatorial venture, like The Great Debate, scaling the mountaintop of a big philosophical question with only fog at its peak?

I actually responded to an entry made about this post but I thought it was a valid contribution to the general thread of debate here: The general feel I have for services like Twitter is that they provide a very easy and very simple way to get the information and thoughts out there for people who don't want the responsibility of running a blog, want to avoid the invasive data - mining of the social network and very quickly fire off something witty, something silly, something topical or genuinely answer that all important Twitter question... What are they doing?

Why do you question real scientists and trust the «quality blogs on both sides of the debate» like WUWT?

My understanding of most of the (lets call it) skeptical positions from people like Roy Spencer is that they essentially claim exactly that: the absence of a large signal compared to noise (or natural variability) and the entire debate is essentially about the question, whether noise is a measurement / statistical problem or the very nature of climate itself?

The whole debate seems rather silly when you put it into the context of bigger questions: What will 8x current consumption actually look like in the developed world?

I've just joined this blog and I really like the fact that people debate and ask reasonable, critical questions but without calling each other names.

I know your tongue is planted firmly in cheek, but I did some research on the matter, and found that the fossil fuel industry, automobile industry, and wal - mart - like fossil - fuel - based mega-scale consumer goods distribution industry have many thousands of times more money at stake (~ $ 10 trillion annually) on the outcome of this debate than do the scientists in question.

So when we examine the climate change debate we should consider whether this issue is like a dispassionate scientific question where we may assume that the math will be used in a neutral manner or is it like a financial or political issue where no sensible person would accept the assumption of neutrality.

I've long intended writing a piece with the provocative title of «the Nazi Thing» on the puzzling question of what it is about the climate debate which makes people on both sides resort to using language like «denier,» «death trains» on the one hand, and «eco-fascism» on the other, when it's so obviously counterproductive.