Sentences with phrase «law does of course»

Not exact matches

Of course, I had no idea, because going to law school doesn't prepare you for making massive amounts of blue cheese dressing.&raquOf course, I had no idea, because going to law school doesn't prepare you for making massive amounts of blue cheese dressing.&raquof blue cheese dressing.»

Of course, there's only so much it can do to guarantee that its subcontractors won't break the law, on the other side of the planeOf course, there's only so much it can do to guarantee that its subcontractors won't break the law, on the other side of the planeof the planet.

It doesn't matter how your passive income grows, as long as it grows (of course within the limits of the law)

Of course, this raises a thorny issue: How do the agents and prosecutors review the documents for privilege status, if the entire point of privilege is that it's not supposed to be seen by people outside the lawyer's office, particularly members of law enforcemenOf course, this raises a thorny issue: How do the agents and prosecutors review the documents for privilege status, if the entire point of privilege is that it's not supposed to be seen by people outside the lawyer's office, particularly members of law enforcemenof privilege is that it's not supposed to be seen by people outside the lawyer's office, particularly members of law enforcemenof law enforcement?

And, while GDPR advocates have pointed to the lobbying Google and Facebook have done against the law as evidence that it will be effective, that is to completely miss the point: of course neither company wants to incur the costs entailed in such significant regulation, which will absolutely restrict the amount of information they can collect.

Law is, of course, a local phenomenon; thus when it comes to England and Wales, my home jurisdiction, I do not think Ether tokens as they exist today should be classified as a security, as I set out in more detail here.

Deficit increases under reconciliation are also subject to the statutory PAYGO law, which does not allow net increases in the deficit over the course of a year.

Of course, the optimal time to do this is before a law is passed.

Of course it brings up my question... why does a church need laws anyway?

And, of course, they whine like crazy when we don't build their dogma into our laws, like the ones on abortion or gay marriage.

This extremely narrow reading of the law basically said «so what if he used the course to recruit, organize and groom candidates; as long as they didn't say «Vote for Jones», it wasn't partisan.»

Just because your version of god says something (which of course mught be somethign diffeent to a different christian group) does not mean it should be the law of the land.

Living this side of Easter, we know what Mary and Martha could not know: that hearing and doing are finally in the realm not of law, but of gospel — because the host of the banquet has himself become the main course.

Of course not, because that law doesn't exist!

And of course there would be those on the right, advocating for Muslim prayer in schools, not worrying about how the few Christian children might be impacted, and doing whatever they can to write bits of Sharia into the law of the land.

The family law courses that do exist have concentrated narrowly on the substantive law and the mechanics of getting people divorced.

Insofar as such structures and institutions are of legal character they may, of course) be regarded as merely human and thus mutable, not necessary laws, because they did not always exist but have been — or have still to be — established.

Yet, of course, Neuhaus did not allow that grace to Mario Cuomo or others who say they are «personally opposed» to abortion but have to deal with the law as it is.

For many law students, unsurprisingly, this creed doesn't survive three weeks of an actual course on constitutional law.

For example, even though the laws in the Pentateuch probably emerged gradually over the course of centuries as people sought ways to live in community, what does it mean that these laws became viewed as stemming directly from God at one point in the life of Moses?

So stop doing that and it will be possible again» (of course you can't repent while you're in the middle of siding with Christ's enemies by taking refuge in the their tents — whether it be by going back to the Law for the Jews, or going back into a life of sin.

Nor, whatever allowance be made for overcoloring in the course of controversy, is it possible to doubt that he did deliberately criticize them, and sometimes in trenchant terms, though we need not assume that all of them were included in such criticism; there were perhaps more teachers of the Law with whom Jesus could find himself in friendly agreement than the two or three who have found their way into the gospels.

Of course, theorists of natural law do not suppose that they can offer a complete account of «what life ought to be.&raquOf course, theorists of natural law do not suppose that they can offer a complete account of «what life ought to be.&raquof natural law do not suppose that they can offer a complete account of «what life ought to be.&raquof «what life ought to be.»

I have not studied the law as a specific topic as I did the human soul, but had to deal with it in the course of my thesis and book on the soul topic.

Of course, this is highly idealized, but nonetheless, it does yield a definition without reference to force and is certainly consistent with the law of universal gravitatioOf course, this is highly idealized, but nonetheless, it does yield a definition without reference to force and is certainly consistent with the law of universal gravitatioof universal gravitation.

One of our main points in setting out this framework is the claim that in some deep sense, to do physics is to find laws that relate (E) to (E1) for separable events E and E1 (including of course the special case that E and E1 pertain to the same substance or object in the naive sense of those words.

Of course, there are just enough government employees left to enforce the law that nobody can do anything productive until Congress gets its act together (could be a while.

Second, materialist physicalism's acceptance of causal determinism, along with the correlative acceptance of the idea that «science» provides precise predictive laws, 5 excludes the idea that a partially self - determining mind could affect the physical course of nature, It is these two metaphysically - based exclusions that, as we have seen, prevent materialist physicalism from doing justice to our inescapable presuppositions about the reality and efficacy of our mental life.

Of course we wish to treat people with compassion and encouragement, even when they are in objectively sinful or irregular states of life, but this does not mean that we can blithely set aside the law of God and change the Lord's own doctrine on marriagOf course we wish to treat people with compassion and encouragement, even when they are in objectively sinful or irregular states of life, but this does not mean that we can blithely set aside the law of God and change the Lord's own doctrine on marriagof life, but this does not mean that we can blithely set aside the law of God and change the Lord's own doctrine on marriagof God and change the Lord's own doctrine on marriage.

If then this issue has been settled by these Doctors of Law or experts in this way, and we certainly are in those situations in which one may resist the governing authority... we are unable to oppose... if in this instance it is necessary to fight back, even if the Emperor himself attacks, or whoever else may do so in his name... That until now we have taught absolutely not to resist the governing authority was due to the fact that we did not know that the governing authority's law itself grants the right to do so; we have of course always diligently taught that this law must be obeyLaw or experts in this way, and we certainly are in those situations in which one may resist the governing authority... we are unable to oppose... if in this instance it is necessary to fight back, even if the Emperor himself attacks, or whoever else may do so in his name... That until now we have taught absolutely not to resist the governing authority was due to the fact that we did not know that the governing authority's law itself grants the right to do so; we have of course always diligently taught that this law must be obeylaw itself grants the right to do so; we have of course always diligently taught that this law must be obeylaw must be obeyed.

It's possible to imagine (it didn't happen, of course, but it's possible to imagine) that the laws of Nazi Germany would have been, could have been, enforced with absolute impartiality, with absolute fairness, with completely impeccable procedures.

If it were an accident, the first time it caused rashes and or nose bleeds and diarrhea, they would have written what caused it in my Medical Records to stop others from causing the adverse reactions, but no, they have to try to prevent a Law Suit and write that I am delusional about the adverse reactions so every Doctor after that forced the adverse reactions on me and or refused to give me the Medical Treatment actually need, while they make money off charging the government for the Toxic Harmful Drugs that a Judge ordered them not to give me, tut they just falsely called me delusional about the Court Orders, to made money poisoning me with Toxic Drugs and Rash Creams, but normally they do that to their suspecting Victims to make money off doing Kidney transplants like they did to my Uncle, but they will not replace mine, because that is what they planned to do to kill me, just ask their associate assassin Dr Kanter of the Minneapolis VA, of course he will say I am delusional after he assaulted me saying the other Hospital Labs were wrong about that Blood Test that show the harm they caused.

Our common sense of how the universe works does not allow us to conceive of God as «zapping» into the normal course of natural laws.

That this interpretation often did violence to the original meaning of the Law, that Jesus» own course of action on occasion was opposed to the Law, is a different matter, and is not inconsistent with his belief that he found in the Law the will of God.

Here is the culmination of Israel's thought about natural law: a glorious day should dawn when man's jungle impulses would atrophy, when right would triumph deep in human nature, and society would pursue its happy course in a state of «anarchy,» of «no law,» because everyone would do the high and noble thing through his love for it, in obedience to the unwritten law inscribed on his heart!

Of course Christianity has provided a similar block to Yahweh's laws so I guess it doesn't matter to him anyway.

Of course we don't really have to worry about Sharia law being implemented in the United States — but do we have to worry about Christian law being imposed on the populace?

Of course the New Testament, when it mentions «signs» or «mighty works,» does not have in mind that negative notion of the contradiction of nature's laws, but something very positive, viz., that in these deeds God himself is acting, that they are evidences of Jesus» close bond with God and of the nearness of God's KingdomOf course the New Testament, when it mentions «signs» or «mighty works,» does not have in mind that negative notion of the contradiction of nature's laws, but something very positive, viz., that in these deeds God himself is acting, that they are evidences of Jesus» close bond with God and of the nearness of God's Kingdomof the contradiction of nature's laws, but something very positive, viz., that in these deeds God himself is acting, that they are evidences of Jesus» close bond with God and of the nearness of God's Kingdomof nature's laws, but something very positive, viz., that in these deeds God himself is acting, that they are evidences of Jesus» close bond with God and of the nearness of God's Kingdomof Jesus» close bond with God and of the nearness of God's Kingdomof the nearness of God's Kingdomof God's Kingdom..

There's nothing we can do about that of course — it's just the nature of the beast — but it's interesting to note that FFP doesn't factor in clear regional differences of wealth in each country nor does it factor in the differing tax laws of each country.

I do think the new law is having a pretty big impact, at least in terms of the amount of fruits and vegetables served, but if the meals are poorly executed at your school, of course you don't want to eat them.

If things are really hectic and you can't get him to settle down, you could try moving to a quieter area, but I generally don't recommend this as it tends to feel a bit like punishment, unless of course you are trying to avoid the in - laws I think the main thing to remember, is every study where we have allowed children access to food, they have eaten enough and a varied diet ensuring that over a period of time children if given the opportunity to eat when hungry will ensure that all their nutritional needs are met.

Even in a system with highly - trained midwives who are integrated into the establishment, unless everyone is legally required to maintain registers, do frequent refresher courses, and KNOW that they will be subject to supervision and if found to be non-compliant with regulations will be deprived of the opportunity to practice, even some of the most «highly trained» will try to get around the letter of any laws on the books.

Witnesses would be under oath and they're of course obligated by law to tell the truth, those who have been the ones who have perpetrated this smear campaign against one of the stellar companies in the country... I think they'll have an obligation then to explain themselves why they could not base their allegations on facts and what they've done to damage an industry.

And of course, there is legal adoption, which does not strip the child of his or her identity as does the Safe Haven Law.

Of course, as Littlejohn rightly points out, after 13 years of Labour government, «if the public really did have the power to change legislation, the government would pass a law against it»Of course, as Littlejohn rightly points out, after 13 years of Labour government, «if the public really did have the power to change legislation, the government would pass a law against it»of Labour government, «if the public really did have the power to change legislation, the government would pass a law against it».

The UK is of course one of the few States that does accept that international law provides a right of humanitarian intervention.

«I saw this as an extension of the existing law to international organizations, so I didn't read it the way they did, but of course I will listen, and if the bill says what they say it says, then I certainly won't support it,» Gillibrand said.

«Justice Atuguba has seniority over me because instead of continuing straight from the fourth year as we used to call it, of law school, to the fifth year which is the professional year or rather the final part of the professional course, I broke and went to do my master's so when I came back they — my first classmates — had already been called to the bar so I was called to the bar with Ato Dadzie and that younger generation,» she told parliament's Appointment Committee on Friday, 16 June when Minority Leader Haruna Iddrisu asked her to clarify to the committee whether she or Justice Atuguba was senior to the other.

Of course, one needs to keep in mind that «difficulty of getting things done» implies that merely «getting things done» - meaning passing more laws - is the beneficial goaOf course, one needs to keep in mind that «difficulty of getting things done» implies that merely «getting things done» - meaning passing more laws - is the beneficial goaof getting things done» implies that merely «getting things done» - meaning passing more laws - is the beneficial goal.

Of course, she doesn't have to go to these annual get - togethers, but it doesn't pay for a law - and - order home secretary to be frozen out of their conferencOf course, she doesn't have to go to these annual get - togethers, but it doesn't pay for a law - and - order home secretary to be frozen out of their conferencof their conference.