Sentences with phrase «do after an argument»

What you do after an argument is much more important than what you actually argued about.

Not exact matches

We have our discussions after, but we don't get into arguments.

[109][110][111] Corzine later wrote that only after the proposal was released did he discover «the harsh reality: the public intensely disliked the idea» and that, in retrospect, he «should have pressed harder to identify the most salient arguments against the plan and developed a strategy to get in front of and respond to those challenges.»

It pains me a bit to say it, because I was a shareholder in Core Labs in the early 2010's — I talked to David Demshur before and he was a great guy, and I really believed in the bull argument for this stock — but I do happen to agree with Einhorn after reading through his presentation.

Using the argument of neutrality is too dismissive to the more pertinent fact at hand — likely about $ 300k was deployed to control $ 1.6 m, to be used in any way shape or form when it is all said and done... retiring abroad, funding their kids college, starting their tube meat meat truck business after they get tired of the lawyering rat race, etc etc..

After about a year or so of his loud and passionate arguing many of us would just avoid him as we did not feel that the arguments were valid nor important enough to listen to.

Look, the argument that anti-abortionists are stupid / irrational / inconsistent because they «do nt care» for the baby after birth and all of that is just a non sequitur.

Out of all the postings on this site today, I found «Derp's «post the most fascinating and informative, as well as deeply revealing.Even after boasting of what seems to be a practically perfect live by any measure, he informs us that he takes pleasure in mocking and ridiculing those of faith who are presumably his opposite; I can only wonder if, given all his supposed accomplishments, he is smart enough to realize how deeply revealing of his true character his remarks are.As a believer, I rarely engage in arguments with my atheist friends, and like to think I wouldn't lower myself to the level of juvenile name - calling and personal attacks against whatever my atheist friends hold dear.Most of the time we simply agree to disagree; when they hold forth with misinformation or ignorance on their assumed «knowledge «of my faith, I try to gently correct them; I certainly don't allow any disagreements we have to devolve into hateful insults and name - calling.

«The pastors face the people (in the meetings), they don't face the town government, so it's like they're praying over us,» Galloway told CNN after the argument.

Do you ever find yourself drawing fire from both sides of an argument after staking some middle ground?

After hearing the arguments, the Orthodox respondent asked each side, «Do you believe in the triune God exposited by the fathers of Nicaea?»

William of Ware, Scotus» teacher at Oxford, devised the argument «it was possible, it was fitting and therefore God did it» in order to defend the Immaculate Conception (an argument sometimes erroneously attributed to Scotus himself) but it is not certain whether this was before or after his pupil had so brilliantly defended the doctrine in public disputation in Paris.

The fundamental flaw with this articles argument is that Santorum's (google it) «surge» didn't happen until after Bachmann's, Perry's, Cain's, etc..

After all, their argument for intelligent design does not identify the intelligent designer as the God of any particular religion.

What is with the Christian backers of their god as soon as they are backed into a corner and they do not have a logical answer they come back well after the fact and start the same BS arguments all over again.

It is the problematic character of this step which makes the ontological argument unsatisfactory as a proof of God's existence although in the case of Hartshorne himself it was perhaps taken, implicitly if not explicitly, when, as he tells us, «about the age of seventeen, after reading Emerson's Essays, I made up my mind (doubtless with a somewhat hazy notion of what I was doing) to trust reason to the end» (LP viii).

His whole argument, particularly in the last portion of the book, is that they are priests after Christ, with priestly duties to perform, some of which are performed out in the world, and others of which are performed in the assembly of believers, gathered before God's throne on the heavenly Zion — and how dare anyone forsake priestly service on the heavenly Zion in favor of letting a Levitical priest do it for you on the earthly Zion!

Sentence two is the closest to an actual argument he makes, but it is a fact that science has little to no information on what happens after we die, as you pointed out yourself, we do not know (in the sense of having empirical proof).

One of the more primitive arguments put forward is that in the embryonic stage, which lasts about two months after conception, the creature does not look human.

Arguments based on your version of a book compiled from dozens of sources hundreds of years after the events they claim to relate and for many parts of which contradictory evidence is a «plenty (No historical evidence whatsoever of an Exodus, for example plus we now know the Egyptians did not use a slave - based economy for construction as one example.

... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself.

The alleged «silence» about the virgin birth from other New Testament authors can not be used as an argument against it since its factuality would have been revealed by Mary only after the resurrection and it did not constitute the centre of the Easter message; Redford even finds hints thatother New Testament authors framed their affirmations to allow for the virgin birth.

but thats not what i'm talking about... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself, so if you have a counter argument i believe you haven't a full understanding of the book — and that would be my overall point... belief without full understanding of or consideration to real life or consequences for the hereafter is equal to a childs belief in santa which is why we atheists feel it is an equal comparision... and santa is clearly a bs story... based on real events from a real historical person but not a magical being by any means!

Perhaps this is because it limits itself to discussing the points raised by Bultmann, and because its author has not yet realized the immense amount of work which remains to be done even after Bultmann's arguments have been disposed of.

After the argument I went to my Buddhist teacher and asked his opinion his response was: «Why do you need me to tell you the answer?

After five years, do I really expect today's argument to change his mind?

And, to tell the truth, I, believing I thought as you did, saw no valid argument to answer you except a fierce love of justice which, after all, seemed to me as unreasonable as the most sudden passion...

I don't get this argument that he will see how much the Ox has developed after leaving — he looks pretty much the same player to me, flashes of brilliance but still gives the ball away cheaply.

And if you are satisfied with one FA cup every ten years then there really is no argument that can change your mind, if fourth place is good enough year after year, and Flamini and Arteta at Dm is satisfactory and starting the season with 2 Senior team CBs is understandable then all I can do is think of you in the same way that i think of all fanatics — men without reason.

There's a better argument to be made there, and if you did it after the final buzzer you may have an even stronger argument.

Many think we should ditch him for a «top goalie» like Manchester United's David De Gea, but if De Gea still looks good to most after shipping three goals against Everton and losing his last three games, their argument doesn't hold water.

Even later, after the war was done, an argument with Pozzo ahead of a friendly against communist Hungary was used to cast aspersions on his character, to the point that he was forced to write a piece headlined «I Am Not A Secret Agent.»

Merson stated that following Townsend's call - up, «it opens it up for anybody», suggesting that his form didn't deserve a place in the England squad and cited his performance against Man United where he was taken off after 30 mins as a basis for his argument (via Sky Sports).

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

We have always managed to get the Top Four in previous seasons but this time though our final placing does not lay in our hands as we await the outcome of Liverpool's game against West Ham, and there are arguments that if we do not make the Top Four and play in the Europa League instead, then maybe we won't get the sudden drop in confidence we get every year after being slaughtered in the Champions League.

I have this argument with my dad everyday, I really don't care we are the fifth richest club in the world, football in my opinion is all about what happens on the pitch not in the accounting department, we as fans were sold a dream by the people at the top of our club including wenger that basically said after Ashburton grove was built we'd compete on the pitch with the best in Europe, guess what we haven't, the only thing we've done is make a rich American and his associates even richer, wenger has been a willing participant in this.

Ignoring the fact that she did come back after her first loss is you guys picking and choosing your facts to favor your arguments.

Like someone said, we've simply moved on from the WOB and the AKB arguments, its massively glaring there is trouble, the players are playing as if they don't care, anyone who doesn't think the issue is our inept way of running a club or our once great manager should just listen to what Peter cech had to say after that disaster.

The United youngsters staged a remarkable fightback to prevail 3 - 2 after trailing by two goals early in the second period but that has nothing to do with the argument.

Don't Respond to Backtalk: You've already set the limit Why do parents react to backtalk after they've already won the argumendo parents react to backtalk after they've already won the argument?

Amidst arguments of how unstructured play is beneficial for kids and «I - want - to - play - netball - because - all - my - friends - in - school - are - doing - it», where do you draw the line when it comes to after - school activities?

What hardly ever gets pointed out, in the «babies die in hospitals» [faux] argument is that, while, yes, babies do die in hospitals, it is after everything possible has been done to save them, whereas in homebirth babies are put at the utmost risk of death by not having proper staff / equipment / conditions, etc. to save them.

As an example, if kitchen clean up and trash removal occurs immediately after the last bite of food is consumed at the table, and homework is done immediately after clean up, then your child will develop routine habits that leave less room for argument.

If you do not distinguish roles after bringing your new baby home, your relationship will experience some arguments.

After all, you can use the «self - defence of all Muslims» argument to justify almost anything you do.

I really did expect this argument to be pretty uncontroversial — after all, it is little more than the systemization of what is pretty much established wisdom on the subject.

What I don't really see is how the Labour party holding three pilots in this Parliament, or even selecting all of its candidates in some form of primary at the next election or the time after would make any really significant difference to arguments for or against first - past - the - post, the Alternative Vote, AV +, AMS, STV and various hybrids thereof.

As commenter Matt Lockshin summed it up after parsing Jon's argument in detail, «I have no doubt that Twitter has its role in political advocacy and organizing, but I just don't see how what you write is supposed to demonstrate that it's actually a strategy.»

The city's argument is in part based on a ruling from the city's Conflict of Interests Board that granted waivers to two de Blasio advisers to continue working with the mayor after leaving City Hall to go work for Hilltop, which ran the Campaign for One New York and associated groups, despite a one - year ban on doing so.

We believe that there are big political arguments to be had between the left and the right of politics, and the left has every reason to be confident about our values and ideas, which have done much to change Britain for the better over the last century and which are in the ascendancy internationally after three decades in which anti-government arguments have often dominated.