Sentences with phrase «does debate like»

And what impact does debate like this have on scientists like Manuelidis and the general public?

Not exact matches

The president would prefer a simple majority to end debate, like is done with executive nominations.

In much the same way that journalists like Chris Wallace have said they don't believe debate moderators should call out lies, because that would be equivalent to expressing an opinion, the Times and other newspapers have always believed that journalists should be rigorously balanced at all times.

The Republican Party's fast journey from debating how to combat human - caused climate change to arguing that it does not exist is a story of big political money, Democratic hubris in the Obama years and a partisan chasm that grew over nine years like a crack in the Antarctic shelf, favouring extreme positions and uncompromising rhetoric over co-operation and conciliation.

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.

Instead of supporting new free trade deals, as most Congressional Republicans do, Donald Trump has opposed deals like NAFTA and the current Trans - Pacific Partnership now being debated in Congress.

Any genuine debate on this point isn't over principle, but enforcement, like setting out what's a reasonable split when family members really do contribute.

Clinton did well in the debate on guns, making Sanders look at times like he was flip flopping.

«But I notice, anytime anything wrong happens, they like to say the Russians are — she doesn't know if it's the Russians doing the hacking,» Trump said at the debate.

Having a debate around hard topics like these is a critical part of our process and to do that effectively, we have to be able to consider even bad ideas, if only to eliminate them.»

President Obama's next - day zingers, which sounded like he came up with them in the car on the drive home from the debate, did little to raise spirits among viewers of Nova and Masterpiece.

When I hear debates on buying and selling bonds like traders discussing equities I just don't get it.

«Having a debate around hard topics like these is a critical part of our process and to do that effectively we have to be able to consider even bad ideas, if only to eliminate them,» Bosworth's statement said.

Wow, what a fun thinking about all these years of debates with fb representatives telling me «consumers don't want privacy rights anymore» and «a startup (sic) like facebook shouldn't be overburdened».

Like many Canadians we have been taken back by the current debate over the support our government provides, or better still does not provide, to our military and to our veterans.

«I know the math is difficult...» Jim Prentice to Rachel Notley during the Leaders Debate Apr 23, 2015 Ms Soapbox doesn't like math.

It is not clear to me at all, even if we do get past the issues with mining centralization, segregated witness, lightning networks and hard forks, that Bitcoin (or Bitcoin - like) blockchain - based cryptocurrencies are the way to do it, but I'm open to informed debate on this point.

At that point, it was about masturbation only (no one had made a comparison to homosexuality), so, without much personal stake in the debate, I thought to myself «See, this is why people don't like the answers, not (always) because it doesn't let them do what they want, but because the answers are sometimes very poor indeed.»

But you, when you don't like how I pharase my arguements and debate with others; when I use what YOU consider meannest and bullying, you then have the right to use words like «Bully, arrogant, sarcastic, antagonistic attitude,» you are just the righteous DEFENDER.

You are correct, if one assumes atheism or a fundamentally different religious cosmology, that the possibility I stated will seem like a false cause (this unemployment came later, therefore that cosmic battle caused it), but again, that would come down to the age - old debate over whether there is a God v. Satan battle in the classical Christian sense (do either God or Satan exist and, if so, how?).

Dear Christians, don't you understand what this «debate» looks like?

That extreme version isn't my scene either, but I do like the act of debate and I do enjoy being challenged even when that means people call me names.

You don't think the «elephant in the room» of OUR time is the fact that we awkwardly pretend affirmative action isn't racist; abortion isn't murder; people compare the gay marriage debate to 300 + years of black slavery, oppression, and / or murder; and the major political parties act like Ron Paul doesn't exist?

I don't like that CNN uses the word «debate» in the ti.tle of this article.

Besides that, you might see a lot of heated debate on boards like these, but in real life, do you think that atheists seek out Christians in the street or in the stores or at the workplace and berate them?

What I find interesting about debates like the one this article engendered is that so many atheists will argue «science,» yet they do not look to actual scientist / believers who made significant contributions to science, yet saw no conflict in doing so while also believing in a «Creator.»

If I bring something to the table they don't understand or like, they will debate me in class with as much passion as some do here.

But, making light of a rejection in his personal life doesn't seem like intelligent debate — it just seems like bullying.

I feel like because Obama had stated at one point all religions lead to heaven, and how he never stated his faith during the debates and Romney did, that the faith most be bold, not hidden.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

There a plenty of non-trinitarian Christian denominations like the Christadelphians, Christian Scientists, Dawn Bible Students, Friends General Conference, Iglesia ni Cristo, Members Church of God International, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, La Luz del Mundo, Living Church of God, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarian Universalist Christians and the United Church of God... The very idea of the Trinity didn't become Christian dogma until some 300 years after Christ's death, and even then it was quite a debate at the Council of Nicea...

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.

God could make himself as obvious as gravity (since he made gravity as obvious as he made gravity), but he doesn't, and so there's no way to determine whether or not god exist and we continue to debate him without any solid proof or meaningful evidence (like we see in biology and chemistry and such).

In general, based on the 2003 interview, it doesn't look like Santorum knows how to talk or think about this issue very well; he doesn't, for example, appear to know how to distinguish the three levels of the right to privacy debate: a) the natural rights level, b) the Constitutional level, and c) the plain - old law level, state and federal.

I have better things to do than debate with the likes of you.

The current Storm Theatre offering of As You Like It does not take a firm stance on either side of the debate, but what it does is perhaps more important: it entertains.

Steve... I think we're floggin» a dead horse here, but for what it's worth, understand that I'm not trying to convince you to think like I do, rather I wd hope that room wd be made for many theological differences.To think discuss and debate theology is well supported by the New Testament and history, and is perfectly within the bounds of what it means to engage our minds with the subject at hand.Theologians and biblical scholars have done this very thing for centuries, revealing a plethora of opinion on the evolving world of biblical studies.Many capable authors have written and debated the common themes as well as the differences between Paul, John, Jesus, the synoptics, etc..

If we do have an understanding of the conversation then the definitions of these «packed» concepts are subjective and we wind up debating terms like «following Jesus» which means something entirely different to me than it did to my 92 year old grandmother.

Ro 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

well, i would have debating it with you being i like Aquinas but i agree with your point about how it is very outdated... however it does give insight into many things about how and why such beliefs are held with high regard.

We have too many sources for the 1900's material to not be credible, but that doesn't mean that historians don't debate the events like nobody's business.

I will be happy to calmy and rationally debate you as long as you would like, but if you think I simply don't understand your argument because I don't agree with it, then you've made a poor deduction.

«Cause we can talk and debate until we're blue in the face / About the language and tradition that he's comin'to save / Meanwhile we sit just like we don't give a sh — / About 50,000 people who are dyin'today.

In that sense, the Presbyterian debates do not feel like friendly arguments over the breakfast table, or even the more heated kinds of exchanges that might take place in the presence of a marriage counselor.

If I don't like what someone says, I debate them or ignore them.

You can not have much of a debate in a comment section like this one, so I do not understand why you think this is a problem.

I have never debated formally and don't like the combative, victory at any cost, atmosphere... -LSB-(T) hat] my students had more interest in the truth I am confident.

Like all other brands of Christianity, Calvinists do not speak with a unified voice in this debate.

But if your sole objection is that you don't like the way I've spoken in serious terms and tried to have a frank debate, then heck Bob, I don't apologise for that.