Sentences with phrase «making changes on moral»

I guess where we would part company is in those cases where you would perhaps make the pope culpable for not making changes on moral issues the church has long held.

Not exact matches

Chad and Scooch judge a listener's moral dilemma, discuss if Scooch is really brokering peace in the Middle East, change point spreads at The Orleans sportsbook while on the podcast, and make their picks of the week.

«He views this as a matter for the church on account of the disproportional impact of climate change on the poor and disadvantaged, which does indeed make it a moral issue.»

Analyse what we know already about what Christian morals are based on - 10 commandments Categorise those commandments and make links with modern Christian teachings - 2 greatest commandments Creative work based on Good Samaritan story Reflective independent work based on modern news story and how those beliefes being put into practice could have changed the outcome.

Davenport touches on how Republicans both inside and outside the beltway are working to explain to fellow conservatives that climate change is real and addressing makes important moral and economical sense.

I encourage you to read «The pope as messenger: making climate change a moral issue,» an essay on The Conversation website by Andy Hoffman, director of the Erb Institute at the University of Michigan, and Jenna White, a graduate student studying the role of religious institutions in shaping humanity's response to global warming.

I've also recommended that Francis watchers read «The pope as messenger: making climate change a moral issue,» an essay on The Conversation website by Andy Hoffman, director of the Erb Institute at the University of Michigan, and Jenna White, a graduate student studying the role of religious institutions in shaping humanity's response to global warming.

We are convinced that ExxonMobil's longstanding support of a small cadre of global climate change skeptics, and those skeptics access to and influence on government policymakers, have made it increasingly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of its diplomacy.

IF, and I know it's a big if, the zoning, etc. were to be changed, even if on the fringes of Branson, these WONDERFUL folks, like other places, would not have to live in their cars, travel 30 - 40 miles to an affordable address in AK... or whatever other alternative choices they make (like selling their souls, on the side, by whatever means, trying to escape that life for a more moral one).

On no more than the basis that «climate change is occurring», moral philosophers tell us what is right, social historians invent lessons from history to make climate criminals in the present, science historians invent conspiracy theorists, and psychologists tell us how to apply distress to change public opinion, and why debate is just too risky to trust to the public.

This website has been interested in working out the moral and ethical implications of the conclusions made by the sociologists working on climate change.

As we increase our exposure, investing in disaster - resilient infrastructure and prepared citizenries not only makes moral and economic sense, it's also not dependent on one's personal views about climate change.

This question is designed to expose the fact that because delays in ghg emissions based on costs to the polluter makes the enormous threat of climate change much more difficult to solve and more likely that serious harms and damages will be experienced, therefore arguments for delays in reducing ghg emissions based upon cost raise moral and ethical issues because the delays are making the problem much worse, more difficult to solve, and great harms inevitable.

This series argues that NGOs, governments, and citizens should ask opponents of climate change policies questions designed to bring attention to the obvious ethical and moral problems with arguments made by opponents of climate change policies based on cost.

With very few exceptions, the US press has utterly failed to cover climate change as an ethical and moral issue while focusing on the scientific and economic arguments against taking action that have been made by opponents of US climate change policies for almost 30 years.

This article, the first of three in a series, proposes what NGOs, governments interested in stronger action on climate change, and citizens should do to expose the obvious and deep moral problems with the most common arguments made by opponents of climate change policies.

This is the second of three articles that makes recommendations on how NGOs and citizens should debate climate change policies if Pope Francis claim that climate change is essentially a moral problem is correct.

In announcing the change, President Obama emphasized the need to «make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology,» yet the new policy, as well as the language that the president used to explain it, underscores that the stem cell debate is in important ways not about scientific facts at all, but about the difficulty of balancing competing moral preferences.

The papal letter, released in June, made a moral case for urgent action on climate change and the environment (Greenwire, June 18).

Professor White suggests that it does matter how opinions are written because they have important consequences for the parties in a particular case and for the future.29 He further argues that a crucial part of legal activity is the criticism of opinions on rational, political, and moral grounds because that is how relevant arguments are made in support of changing or retaining current rules of law.30 For him, the bigger question «is whether law will move in the direction of trivializing human experience, and itself, or in the direction of dignifying itself and that experience.»

Mr. Sirota offers quite a bit to chew on in just over 1000 words, but his argument, as I understand it, boils down to the following propositions: 1) Judges must generally apply the law as written and should work to foster stable legal doctrine, 2) In applying the law, judges can not avoid making moral and value - laden judgments; and 3) Judicial moralizing is, to a certain extent, desirable due to «democratic process failures,» meaning that the legislative process is not properly responding to the changing will of the people (Mr. Sirota also discusses briefly the circumstances in which courts should be permitted to overrule precedents.

What makes VRChat so inherently interesting is watching people figure out how to address the moral and ethical norms that change when people take on the persona of their favorite character in - game and drop their real name.