Paris (CNN)- After a week of deadly, international protests against an anti-Islam film, a French satirical magazine is
fueling the debate between freedom of expression and offensive provocation.
Not exact matches
CNN: Reaction to anti-Islam film
fuels debate on free speech versus hate speech The deaths of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans amid protests against a film that denigrates Islam has sparked global discussion and
debate about whether there is a line
between free speech and hate speech and, if so, where it lies.
The argument over vestments has since waxed and waned in the Anglican community, adding
fuel to the
debate between «high church» and «low church.»
Fueled by local prejudice and nativist traditions, it continued to deepen the divide
between the heirs of the Reformation
debates.
New results from Dawn spacecraft
fuel debate on whether the dwarf planet is a habitable oasis
between Mars and Jupiter
These results
fueled an old
debate between two schools.
The tragic events are
fueling ongoing
debate about how to manage the process of contact
between isolated and settled indigenous people.
From the alleged
debate over the film's final cut
between star Edward Norton and the studio, to the recent announcement that Norton would be snubbed a writing credit for his polish of Zak Penn's script, the movie was gearing up to be a publicity -
fueled disaster.
In Creation, the life work of scientist Charles Darwin
fuels the heated
debate between believers and non-believers.
For more than a decade, the
debate over public school reform has created friction
between teachers unions, administrators, school boards, parents, policymakers, and other stakeholders in public education and has
fueled disagreements over how to improve the quality of teaching and learning for children.
The ongoing
debate in Washington over
fuel economy, however, has introduced some contradiction over the relationship
between size and safety.
Nevertheless, the new report is likely to
fuel the sometimes vitriolic
debate between environmentalists who see free - roaming domestic cats as an invasive species — superpredators whose numbers are growing globally even as the songbirds and many other animals the cats prey on are in decline — and animal welfare advocates who are appalled by the millions of unwanted cats (and dogs) euthanized in animal shelters each year.
The first New York issue contained three seminal essays: Michael Fried's «Art and Objecthood,» along with Robert Morris's «Notes on Sculpture,» and Sol LeWitt's «Paragraphs on Conceptual Art,» that added the
fuel to the ongoing and intense
debate on the war
between formalism and minimalism.
It could be parsed as a Pangaean Affairs article by an editorial collective of ammonites critical of the elitist vertibrate policy
debate between coprolite carbon sequestration advocates, and radical therapods demanding more tree fern peatbeds to
fuel posterity's struggle to power through Snowball Earth episodes in epochs to come.
The
debate goes beyond the old battle line
between renewable energy and fossil
fuels and highlights the value of of nimble power sources, like microgrids and distributed energy resources.
A tactic used by ethanol backers trying to defend the relatively defenseless Renewable
Fuel Standard (RFS) is attempting to frame the RFS
debate as one
between America's oil and natural gas companies and renewable energy.
The clash
between Neste and Greenpeace highlights one of the key ideological
debates over climate change: Business and politicians believe that a «technological» fix such as alternative
fuels can solve the problem and also generate profits; many environmental groups believe the real solution to global warming lies in reducing consumption.
The way the media and cable TV frame the national
debate may make it seem like there's an even split
between supporters of fossil
fuels and supporters of renewable alternatives.
A link
between climate change and the burning of fossil
fuels had been mooted but
debate would not move into the political sphere for more than a decade.
That many people imagine there is a genuine «
debate»
between «both sides of the issue» is a tribute to the success of the fossil
fuel industry's deliberate campaign of deception.
Although the connection
between greenhouse gas emissions and the strong hurricanes of 2005 continues to be
debated, the events put a focus on efforts to reduce dependence on fossil
fuels.
Moderators continued to ignore the issue in Thursday's Democratic
debate, despite significant policy differences
between the two Democratic candidates, though Sen. Bernie Sanders did link fossil
fuel donations to GOP politicians» rejection of climate science.
Like the tobacco lobbyists who spent years denying the links
between smoking and cancer, global warming denialists don't have to win the
debate — they simply have to confuse the public indefinitely to successfully undermine any political action which might hit the interests of their backers in the fossil
fuel industries
The President, as he often does — and to his credit — also reframed the
debate between jobs creation and protecting the environment, saying that the jobs of the 21st century will be
fueled by green energy: «We've rejected the notion that we have to chose
between creating jobs and a health environment.»
The signing of the order, just hours before we recorded, helped
fuel what certainly would already have been a very heated
debate between our two guests.