Sentences with phrase «heard arguments like»

«I haven't heard an argument like that since the commentary for Kissing Jessica Stein.»

Not exact matches

The «stock accumulation» line refers to a toehold position that Simon has accumulated in Macerich; people like to complain about toeholds these days, but I have never heard a serious argument that they might be illegal.

Let's hope that when the Supreme Court hears oral arguments on the case on October 2, the Justices will side with regular working people like Hobson, not with the big bosses and corporations who want to use the fine print to rig the rules against the rest of us.

How many times have we heard and succumbed to arguments like these at home or at the office?

We've heard similar «steady state» based arguments just like the one laid out by Leslie Wickman over and over again here.

I would like to hear another argument for keeping things the way they are besides «It's Bush's fault» or «you're a racist».

no no no, i first engage them in a conversation... normally ending badly due to them not liking my choice of argument or tools i use in a conversation over belief... so in short i am norally the one insulted and left to think... which i believe is the same way children act when they hear the word «NO»... but i have had some great conversations with people over religion, its just a rare thing.

Indeed, an argument could be made that at no time since the First Great Awakening have so many churches of disparate denominational, theological and stylistic approaches been so united in terms of their music: one can now walk into old - line Pentecostal churches, small - town evangelical congregations, mall - like suburban megachurches, and many a mainline Protestant sanctuary across the country on any given Sunday morning and hear the same hymns and choruses done in approximately the same musical styles, with similar settings and instrumentation.

The «argument» has to start somewhere... like you claiming to have never heard from God, and me responding that I don't believe you.

The «argument» has to start somewhere... like you claiming to hear from god, and me responding that I don't believe you.

Literally every argument I've heard from religious type eventually boils down to something like «I felt God».

Well if you have an argument that I haven't heard before and has not been rufeted, then I'd like to hear it (TAG and Kalam have been thoroughly torn apart for years as a heads up).

I've heard more than a handful definitions or repentance and the content of saving faith and all make pretty strong arguments to someone like me who doesn't really know a whole lot (and even though I hold to faith alone in Christ alone there's even tons of different opinions on what that even means lol).

In my opinion Arsenal and Wenger will probably surprise us and appoint a manager we have never heard of, just like they did with the prof.. But just for the sake of argument I am going to make my choice from people we know.

Let's face it we've heard all the arguments, AOB (yawn), AKB (naive) and what I think is the majority of gooners (those like me) who are disappointed with this seasons lack of progress, the injury issues we keep having, are generally pleased with recent transfers but see very clearly we need more.......

I am happy to be persuaded Ospina is second rate and will not improve but would like to hear the arguments first before retiring him.

If someone still thinks Philly crushed NO in that deal, regardless of Holiday missing about half of his first two season on the team, I'd like to hear the argument.

It is a challenge to deal with a high level of resistance... If I were in that spot what I would LIKE to do would be to mirror the first response that seems to be moving away from engagement... the less rational argument... I'd try to stay with his energy... like, «so you're really firm about your view that...» reflecting back what I heard him say, and continue along that pLIKE to do would be to mirror the first response that seems to be moving away from engagement... the less rational argument... I'd try to stay with his energy... like, «so you're really firm about your view that...» reflecting back what I heard him say, and continue along that plike, «so you're really firm about your view that...» reflecting back what I heard him say, and continue along that path.

I can understand an argument that having the baby sleep in the same room might be helpful, because there could be things that you don't hear on a baby monitor, but other than that, it all sounds like complete nonsense.

And though an argument over a Facebook relationship status may seem like a strange reason to split, it's hardly the weirdest grounds for divorce that we've ever heard.

[2] due process is something like a court proceeding or formal hearing, with notices, evidence, argument, rebuttal, reasoning etc..

I suspect the former, but would like to hear a reasoned argument for the opposite or latter scenario.

They want to hear about all sorts of stuff like what you had for lunch and what arguments you're having with your roommates.

I've heard arguments that BPM manages to capture the feel of what it was like to be there, but if you weren't there, I'm afraid it's not very compelling.

There is not enough time: Like the arguments we've heard about why recess has been minimized, some would argue that Common Core has gotten in the way of reading time.

This is all swell, up until funders feel like they've heard all the arguments and sorted through all the options.

This isn't specifically directed at anyone here, but I've never really heard an argument against digital comics that goes beyond «I like the way comics feel and smell and oh the experience and OH MY GOD YES YES PRINT I LOVE IT.»

I've heard arguments that infrastructure is a separate asset class that merits its own allocation in a portfolio but it simply sounds like a fad to me.

Most Aussies eavesdrop on a family argument four houses away, yet become selectively deaf upon hearing words like «stop that», «come here» and «be quiet».

I'd like to hear the Nintendo side of this argument now.

Hell, you could say that's why sites like ours can co-exist; people like to hear different arguments on a game.

Your arguments sound suspiciously like the ones I heard worker drones on GAF with no hands on with any of the games parrot over and over.

We hear arguments within the movement about whether property destruction — not arson at this point, but the window breaking of the Black Bloc in cities like Portland — is ever appropriate.

Yes, we should be doing things like finding ways to reduce lung damage from interior fires (I've heard this one specifically given as an argument to NOT put money in CO2 emmission reductions since millions of children are dying now exposed to interior smoke fires in developing countries, and the money would be more effective in providing gas cookers).

I'm afraid your argument reads much like the one we hear from the anti-vaccine advocates who defend Andrew Wakefield — the disgraced physician who published that shamelessly fraudulent study supposedly linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine to childhood autism.

It's actually like saying «this is the best argument I have heard for supporting Newt Gingrich, even though I don't have a clue what the argument means.»

It is rather like saying «this is the best argument I have heard for supporting Newt Gingrich, (even thought I really prefer Mitt Romney)».

In any event, though you might hear what sound like mathematical arguments occasionally from the Intelligent Design crowd, the very crux of the disagreement really comes down to what conceptually counts as an explanation in a logical way.

I have heard all the arguments about radiation being emitted and not knowing where it is going but whether radiation from a colder body warms a warmer body has yet to be demonstrated and seems to ignore well established properties like reflection, scattering etc..

When I hear / read an argument like that, I just know that Wags, GaryM, Chief, or Peter Lang are displaying poor reasoning skills — poor reasoning skills that are completely unrelated to their political ideology.

In addition, I doubt you would hear arguments against other service providers that sound like protectionism.

After a few minutes, it appeared to me that he opposed the very idea of Alberta on principle and wasn't at all interested in hearing my argument (based on Ezra Levant's book Ethical Oil) that I'd rather buy my oil from Alberta than from undemocratic regimes like Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, or Nigeria; regimes that either brutalize women, exploit the local population, decapitate those convicted of «crimes,» stone adulterers, discriminate against minorities, have no environmental standards whatsoever, or try to govern their citizens as if it's the 8th century and not the 21st.

When I discussed Justice McEwen's ruling (holding the fees unconstitutional) at first instance, I noted that three threads run through his reasons: a separation of powers argument, according to which the hearing fees interfered with the constitutionally protected prerogatives of the judiciary; an individual rights argument, according to which there is a constitutionally - protected right to go to court, with which the fees interfere; and a difficult - to - characterize argument according to which the hearing fees are contrary to a certain idea (l) of what public services ought to be like.

«The point of an argument is to come out of it feeling like you've been heard,» O'Neal says.

In our roles as Relationship Experts, we often hear partners making comments like: — I'm exhausted from the endless arguments that we have.

Most couples tell me that they want to feel connected with their partner again; to stop the «same old arguments» from cycling over and over; to stop living like roommates; to end the painful silences; to feel heard and understood; and to feel hopeful, and happy again.»

Nobody likes to hear that they frequently spark arguments, or that their communication skills are below standard.

Many couples tell me that they try to have conversations about sex, but it always leads to an argument, and both partners feeling like they aren't being heard, and like neither is getting their needs met.

There's an old argument in the real estate industry that you've probably heard — listing data is aggregated by real estate search sites like Zillow, which makes big bucks on that free firehose of data, but doesn't send a cut of said profits back to the content providers (and should).