Sentences with phrase «liberal thought which»

Not exact matches

«I think we can see... the effect of lessons they learned from the first Abe administration, which gave up mid-stream,» said Tetsuro Fukuyama, an upper house lawmaker whose Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) ousted Abe's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in 2009, only to be crushed themselves at the polls in December.

The Liberals have also put this budget through a gender - based analysis, which involves thinking about how a certain measure might affect men and women, or boys and girls, in a different ways, while accounting for other intersecting factors such as income, ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation.

Chrystia Freeland, The Globe and Mailâ $ ™ s candidate in Toronto Centre, recently wrote a book about inequality (which I have not yet read) and is supposed to â $ œbring fresh thinking to the Liberal Partyâ $ ™ s economic team.â $ She has already attracted a few jabs from right - wingers Terence Corcoran and William Watson.

Gee, and I thought the liberals and Dion were all about the environment, which is why May is the one party Green lobby for «Dion» as PM.

Pierre Bessard is president and executive trustee of the Liberal Institute, Switzerland's independent research and educational think tank founded in 1979, which he joined in 2007 and has helped expand with a new team since then.

So instead of recommending Jaume, I'll turn you to what is, so far, a pretty solid recent collection on Tocqueville, which I know contains one particularly rich essay, «Tocquevillean Thoughts on Higher Education in the Middle East,» by Joshua Mitchell, a leading participant in ongoing efforts to introduce genuine liberal arts education to the Arab world, in Quatar and Iraq specifically.

One stops to think of actual countries of sand, which include more than a few particularly violent locales, places where people are not as willing as Mary Oliver to concede the comfy and common received idea of liberal Christianity that we all worship the same deity by «whatever name.»

I don't know, but I'll risk a guess that the editors thought it worth a momentary suspension of their liberal propensities to have someone take on with gusto, which Laurent certainly does, those terrible Catholic neoconservatives who construe Catholic social doctrine in a way supportive of a market economy and liberal polity.

Nonetheless, the burden of this essay is to identify a certain respect in which Whitehead's thought departs from liberal commitments.

To assent to the rules of engagement prescribed by liberal public reason is to accept a voluntary and arbitrary limit on how deeply one is willing to think, which then becomes an involuntary limit on how far one is able to see.

The feeling is mutual if not quite the term, which reflects the liberal tendency to think of these matters fundamentally in political terms.

The target is, rather, those forms of broader modern liberalism which have produced certain ways of thinking about faith and the church which can be found in both conservative and in so - called «liberal» churches.

But the charge puts me in mind of the colloquium discussion in the January issue of First Things which treated the debate between so - called «liberal» and «radical» Catholics, perhaps because my contribution to that discussion has elicited similar accusations of political irresponsibility or moral cowardice from people sympathetic to the liberal line of thought.

A lot of liberals think everyone should have the same options, which isn't true, some options you need to earn.

Because of the opprobrium which soon became attached to the word, most of those opposed to liberal Christian thought preferred to call themselves «evangelical».

The Roundtable project got its start with a meeting at Yale in March 2003 and a follow - up meeting the next July, to which Geoffrey Boisi invited a group of mainly liberal usual suspects to think and plan about the future of the Church in America.

about people who experience same - sex attraction trying to live a Christian life, this fuller exposition of his thought on the new ideologies presented a fascinating look into the way in which colonialism — discredited by liberals and to lesser extent many conservatives as well — has gone away from the actual military and political rule seen in previous centuries, to a stealthier and subtler form of the exertion of foreign power.

The same is true of many media reform efforts: by attempting to get people excited about liberal bias in the news, or nudity or profanity in a particular program, or the ideological bent of a certain series, or whether a network is «Christian,» concerned leaders have diverted the attention of viewers from the most important problem, the basic point, namely, that the whole process - of - television is providing us with a worldview which not only determines what we think, but also how we think and who we are.

Looking back upon his ministry in later years, he confessed, «About midway in my ministry, which extends roughly from the peace of Versailles to the peace of Munich, measured in terms of Western history, I underwent a fairly complete conversion of thought which involved rejection of almost all the liberal theological ideals with which I ventured forth in 1915.»

This is shown by the popularity of Adolf von Harnack's lectures of 1900, The Essence of Christianity, in which he presented the most liberal interpretation of Christian thought to date.

In the end, however, Feezell's moderate view (which leans toward the «conservative view») is not too much different in practical effect from my or Hartshorne's moderate view (which leans toward the «liberal view») in that I am only delivering a carte blanche for abortion in the early stages of pregnancy and pointing out that the fetus in the later stages of pregnancy has a moral status analogous to that of an animal, a status which I think deserves considerable attention on our part.

By «liberal theology» I mean the movement in modern Protestantism which during the nineteenth century tried to bring Christian thought into organic unity with the evolutionary world view, the movements for social reconstruction, and the expectations of «a better world» which dominated the general mind.

In the heyday of the liberal social gospel which occurred at the same time that form criticism and other important New Testament studies were making a fresh impact on Christian thought, the kingdom was considerably explored.

It was a great shock to liberal Protestant theology of the turn of the century when men like Albert Schweitzer (1875 - 1965) and Johannes Weiss (1863 - 19I4) drew attention to the eschatological character of the New Testament and made it clear that Jesus, his apostles, and the early churches, all lived and spoke in a thought - world which, in important respects, is completely foreign to us.

The honeymoon, that is, between the now enfeebled and increasingly remote souls who for over a quarter of a century had carped and sneered at Pope John Paul II (and by the same token at «PanzerCardinal» Joseph Ratzinger) but who had nevertheless hoped against hope for a Pope who would be somehow reborn if not as a fully paid - up liberal, as a Pope at least who would go easy on all that counter-cultural JPII stuff about being «signs of contradiction» and about continuity with the pre-conciliar Church and who had breathlessly found (so they thought) that, lo, it was even so, in the wonders of Deus Caritas Est. «On his election last spring,» carolled The Tablet, «the former CardinalRatzinger was widely assumed to have as his papal agenda the hammering of heretics and a war on secularist relativism, subjects with which he was associated as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.»

Nevertheless, both the Catholic tradition and conservative Protestantism strike certain deep notes which, though not absent from liberal Protestant thinking and preaching, have been underemphasized to our great loss.

Mr. Tingley thinks that all of this is implied in Newman's teaching that liberal knowledge is to be sought «for its own sake,» which he thinks excludes the possibility of liberal knowledge being sought for the sake of wisdom.

Writing on the website Spiked, Ann Furedi, the head of BPAS (the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, a euphemism similar to «Planned Parenthood»), notes that «most people who think of themselves as liberal and modern - thinking believe that rape, incest, youth, poverty or even general «unwantedness» are «good reasons» for doctors to approve abortion; and they think «sex selection» is a bad reason, which should be stopped.»

The only way they can hold the existing party together is to hope for an evolution in thought over the next 4 years, producing a more socially liberal base (possible... but won't happen quickly) or to have some other very large even occur which puts the dems in such a bad light as to lift the pressure (possible, but won't reverse the social trends).

But a body of newer work on the apostle — including, perhaps, as Hurtado notes, Wright's own new books (which I haven't had the chance to finish reading yet)-- reveals that Paul may, after all, look less like a liberal Westerner than the New Perspective has taught us to think and more like a Christ - haunted figure whose radical social practices arose directly from his pioneering, innovative thinking about the identity and achievement of Jesus Christ.

A liberal education has a wide range of interests, challenging the student to think, to express himself well, to organize his thoughts, and to see reality, in total, more clearly — unlike STEM education, which channels one's mind into a single area.

This attitude causes liberal education to be disregarded because it is «old,» even though it is a treasure of outstanding past thinking which has not become obsolete.

A liberal education, if added to a STEM or business degree in graduate school, could greatly benefit our country, which has seen very little good thinking in government, politics, and business as of late.

With the ecological crisis, the threat of nuclear war, and international monetary problems, everyone is thinking in apocalyptic terms — except the liberal, contented church, which long ago made its peace with the present and trusted in tomorrow.

For consider Whitehead's piece «An Appeal to Sanity,» which contains thoughts meant to gladden the heart of any classical liberal:

I think he was saying radical liberal ends are best achieved through modernized social democratic means... which may refer to democratic republicanism.

The clarification was necessary presumably because he had become painfully aware that the other kind of liberalism — the «muscular» one that has a much clearer idea of the right way to act, speak and even think — was a powerful, increasingly hegemonic force in the liberal circles in which he moved.

Miller 2.0 I think the important point on which it would be worth trying to build agreement is that almost all social democratic and liberal socialist conceptions of equality and fairness do have scope for legitimate or merited differences of outcome.

In the end it comes down to a difference between a liberal perspective which wants to empower without being too judgmental about specific goods, and a more traditional social democratic approach which thinks in terms of access to specific «merit goods».

Mike, perhaps rather than reading a couple of fringe blogs by right - libertarians (and even those don't hold the opinions you're attributing to them, but often talk about alternative economic ideas like a citizens» income) who are about as representative of mainstream Liberal Democrat thought as Tony Benn is of Labour, you should look at sites like http://socialliberal.net/, which more or less represents the mainstream of the party.

It is worth looking more closely at the work of «Progressive Vision `, the «campaigning liberal think - tank» to which Daniel Hannan sources his questionable expertise on the NHS.

Robert Page asks: Instead of skirmishing with the Conservatives and Liberals over «ownership» of the «progressive» label do you think that that the Labour Party should define itself unambiguously as a socialist party which believes that the state has a positive and active role to play in creating a more equal society?

The liberal understanding of utilitarianism is perhaps best understood through the work of John Rawls, who proposed a thought experiment along roughly these lines: suppose that you're a soul waiting to be born, but you don't know which body you're going to be born into and what experiences that body is going to have.

I think you really need to specify exactly what you mean by «liberal» in this context, as there are several different meanings, some of which are fairly contradictory.

I draw his attention to section 21 of the coalition agreement, which says in respect of the incident to which I think he is referring, that «arrangements will be made to enable Liberal Democrat MPs to abstain in any vote.»

Anyone who thinks that this does not provide the resources with which to solve the Blue Labour problem of the detachment of places like West Cumbria is not thinking imaginatively enough about the rich ideas bequeathed by the liberal tradition.

Sir Malcolm Bruce, Liberal Democrat MP for Gordon, said: «The point about this area is that it's Alex Salmond's backyard and his basic proposition has been overwhelmingly rejected here in Aberdeenshire, which I think will have implications.»

Tim Montgomerie of ConservativeHome thinks that was over-egging the pudding, and Jackie Ashley reckons that Clegg is still struggling to find a distinctive tone in which he can both defend his role within the government and also explain why people should go for the Liberal Democrats over the Conservatives.

That is a team which I think will really take my messages, my priorities and that of the Liberal Democrats out to the British people.»

[125] Burke was affiliated with the Whig Party which eventually became the Liberal Party, but the modern Conservative Party is generally thought to derive from the Tory party and the MPs of the modern conservative party are still frequently referred to as Tories.