The lengthy report sheds light on the complexity of the contemporary dating landscape, and reveals a significant trend toward more open -
minded stances on issues surround sex, gender roles, and dating.
Not exact matches
I genuinely was interested in this subject because of late it has somewhat been playing
on my
mind and so sought to discover the truth
on the matter and so sought out discussions and literature by christian writers that I might examine their different
stances on the
issue and try to find a moral cross-section as I think is appropriate for all questions since the ranging views are like politics ranging from far left wing to far right wing views.
To my
mind, to avoid taking a principled
stance - either for an increase or against it - and to remain silent
on the
issue would repeat the mistake we made at the election - even if the money markets do applaud George Osborne for raising VAT.»
«I don't think [college] presidents should (or probably even can) be «neutral»
on all
issues,» says Nannerl Keohane, former president of Duke University in Durham, N.C., and Wellesley College in Wellesley, Mass. «But the
stances, and the mode of expression of opinions, should be chosen with care, with the benefit of advice from others, and with the long - term interests of the university, as well as the society, in
mind.»
Taking a neutral
stance at this point
on rehashed work from «NIPCC» (Fred Singer and friends), well known for serial, serious errors in overall interpretation, analysis and communication of the science and transparent but largely unexamined ideological bias at play in their playground «reports» — never
mind suggesting that this kind of effort «competes» with the work of the world's climate scientists and the 2,500 multidisciplinary specialists contributing to IPCC reports combined with the tens of thousands of additional scientists and many others who raise real questions that result from reading, reviewing, evaluating and evolving the information in both IPCC summaries and domestic science and discussion of the science, knowledgeably and in good faith and with open identification of the nature of the social and political
issues — is just not credible.