Sentences with phrase «n't free act»

The law, known as The Establishing Protections for Freelance Workers Act or «Freelance Isn't Free Act» («FIFA»), imposes... Continue reading →

According to the New York Times, «Known as the Freelance Isn't Free Act, the measure requires anyone hiring a freelance worker to agree in writing to a timetable and procedure for payment, and increases the potential awards to freelancers bringing legal complaints against those who have failed to pay them promptly.»

Not exact matches

He added that not only did the US effectively hang the UK «out to dry» by not staying in lockstep with the ally from the start, it was also signaling to Russian President Vladimir Putin that «he is free to act with impunity, including by carrying out deadly acts in the UK.»

On their surface, the latest batch of Religious Freedom Reformation Act (RFRA) laws, which have passed in 20 U.S. states, not including Arkansas, appear to protect the free exercise of religion.

But it also includes measures that the Opposition Parties may not want to support; for example; the increase in annual Tax Free Savings Account contribution limit; changes to the sick leave provisions of federal employees; and retroactive legislation to protect the RCMP from possible criminal charges with respect to the destruction of data under the Access to Information Act.

The Democrats, meanwhile, were not against selective acts of protection for industries from areas they represented but generally stood for low tariffs and free trade.

I am not a big fan of schadenfreude — that is, the act of getting joy from the suffering of others — but you can feel a little bit better about your own financial problems when you realize that few people are free of money stress.

Default - free money does not act as an inferior «hot potato» when investors are risk - averse.

«Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should «make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,» thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.»

I'd like to believe that my good deeds and my bad deeds are acts of invisible men... but I can't help but feel empowered by my one and only REAL RIGHT and REAL FREEDOM, free choice.

There won't be a free pass to «act a fool», people will always have the right to THINK that person was a dumb ass for it and rightfully so.

If child abuse was a disease, and if religion did not get a free pass on criminal acts, child abuse by rcc priests would be classed as a pandemic.

To believe that matter is all there is, is to believe you don't have free will because matter does act according to law.

Dear Abby hopeless Mom and wife ism, you have been bored in suburb by sexual fantasies pool boy, hooker and Abbyism, feeling guilty, by committing Abbyism fantasy not with husband ism against innocent of marriage, now it is time for vibrator to leave Abbyism, faithful ism and Abby adultry ism, hopeless romantic ism, be sexual fantasies pool boy and act according to lust of American housewife boredom with hubby muscular suntan ism GOD HE»S HOT, free yourself from sexual fantasies pool boy, filth of genitals is, fantasy, you two martini's at noon micro bikini pizza dare and act like slut by flaunting hot bod of massage therapist ism of One mom under boredom with hubby muscular suntan ism GOD HE»S HOT and bulge inequality.

Additionally, it removes god's omnipotence in that he can not act according to his own «free will»; rather, he is obliged to act only in accordance with this «good nature.»

While it is true that God's providence controls all the acts of human beings, still, that does not destroy man's «free agency.»

Yet though it can not be defined, the free temporal act of God's particular satisfaction toward a particular can be described in terms of its intensity.

The free act is not wholly describable antecedently, in view of its conditions, nor consequently, as the inevitable outcome of its conditions.

So when I think and write about God being redeemed, I am not actually freeing God (for He is already free), but about freeing ourselves in how we think about God and act toward Him.

@Jimmy Joe, I'm sure there are independent segments who think chrystals hold special powers, homeopathy is medicine, people have «free will» that acts outside physical laws, and there is an invisible power of chi running through our bodies... not to mention a bunch of other stuff.

I notice you didn't respond to the conflict with judgment according to free will, i.e. these children were judged for the acts of their parents.

It does nt matter what your background is He will come and consume your heart with his Love and holiness (being free from the contamination of hate, twistedness, and everything that is anti-love) I HAVE met a few Christians who truely follow the commands of Jesus and They really acted like Jesus and that's what drew me to it.

Faithful to it, Vatican I recognised that faith involves a free act which can not «be produced necessarily by arguments of human reason» (DS 3035, 3010); hence the Council added to those external signs the «internal helps of the Holy Spirit» so that the former might be «most certain signs of divine revelation adapted to every intelligence» (DS 3009f, 3033f); as a result faith relies on «a most firm foundation» and «none can ever have a justreason for changing or doubting that same faith» (DS 3014, 3036; 2119 - 2121).

(Bultmannian spiritualizing, for which, if God is the Wholly Other, all these manifestations are just forms of expression with no real content, is certainly quite unacceptable, for why should not the Almighty be free to act in this way too?)

The original excuse offered by them after sinning was that they were not really free, that they had acted under a constraining influence, the subtlety of the tempter....

Because the birth control cases all focus on a 1993 federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, not the Constitution, the Justices will face questions about whether the mandate to provide free access to 20 forms of birth control drugs or devices, sterilization, screenings, and counseling imposes a «substantial burden» on religious freedom of nonprofit employers with religious objections to some or all contraceptives, whether the mandate in fact serves a «compelling interest» of the government, and whether an attempt to provide an exemption from the mandate satisfies the requirement that such an accommodation is «the least restrictive means» of achieving the government's policy interest.

Faithful to it, Vatican I recognised that faith involves a free act which can not «be produced necessarily by arguments of human reason» (DS 3035, 3010); hence the Council added to those external signs the «internal helps of the Holy Spirit» so that the former might be «most certain signs of divine revelation adapted to every intelligence» (DS 3009f, 3033f); as a result faith relies on «a most firm foundation» and «none can ever have a just reason for changing or doubting that same faith» (DS 3014, 3036; 2119 - 2121).

The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination, shall forever hereafter be guaranteed; and no person shall be denied any civil or political right, privilege or capacity, on account of his opinions concerning religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be construed to dispense with oaths or affirmations, excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the good order, peace or safety of the state.

Hence the Catholic doctrine of justification does not profess a semi-Pelagian synergism according to which salvation would be divided up into God's gracious act and the independent free act of man.

Your notion of the «given'to God seems close to what I think of as the dependence of God upon the past as the sum of acts of more or less free beings, to whose activity God is passive, since otherwise it would not be real activity.

It does not cure our ills without our cooperation, freeing us from all responsibility in the process of becoming more god - like in our thinking, feeling and acting.

Major Jones, in The Color of God, asserts that black theology encourages black folk to be free «from their traditional fear of whites, so that they not only can articulate their feelings but also so that they will act upon them.»

We are not mere biological organisms acting by instinct or reflexes; we are free within limits to direct our destinies by ideals and goals.

When Buber speaks of the free man as free of causation, process, and defined being, he does not mean that the free man acts from within himself without connection with what has come to him from the outside.

School boards are not free to conduct their affairs autonomously; they can act only within the limitations and in accordance with the standards and requirements set forth by the state.

But unless the free act of liberation moves rapidly toward an act of institution or constitution, an act not of throwing off the past but of establishing the future, then even the liberation itself turns into its opposite.

The god of the philosophers sustains the orderliness of the world, but does not give it being in a free act of love, and thus is not personal.

So, in other words, a Godless society would NOT be any better than one with a God under which people with free will turn against and act like... what... Atheists?

A more relational way of saying this is that God's freedom must be reenacted to be free — not repeated slavishly, with full attention given to the particular details and circumstances, but reenacted, taken up anew in fresh acts of free, creative activity.

The «Claim» upon God So, does this not undermine the free act of Revelation?

But if a man believes in the omnipotent, omniscient and loving God his life will be destiny in an even deeper sense: for it is wholly borne by the power of God without which nothing, not even man's own free act, can exist; his life as a whole and in all its details is always lived before the omniscient God of love.

But all this is even today the free act of the individual, for which he must be trained and formed, to which he may not, indeed can not, be compelled.

It is theological by its very nature, since in every free act God is present, though not explicitly grasped, as its fundamental impulse and final goal.

So let me try and get this straight, if religious doctrine does not define some practice as against the law or evil but yet the laity performs these unlawful acts, it keeps the church free from culpability?

Even if God is not known or not expressly visualized in the free act: wherever freedom is really exercised, this happens in silently stretching beyond all individual data into the ineffable, quiet, incomprehensible infinity of the primeval unity of all thinkable reality, in an anticipation of God.

Freedom would only be the indifferent freedom to this or that, the infinite repetition of the same or the contrary (which is only a species of the same), a freedom of the eternal return of the same Ahasverus, if it were not of necessity the final freedom of the subject to itself that is freedom to God, though this truest «object» of freedom might not be conscious in the individual free act.

Freedom is not meant to pass the time but to gain eternity, because God is made present through the Yes of freedom, regard - less of whether this free act knows it or not.

Assumed, Mr. Long and his Free Church see baptism as a mere symbolic act, I would not wonder that he experienced a fall (I don't know, whether he has really experienced a fall, but it is supposed in the article above), because he can not be connected with the true Redeemer.

Although some individuals elect to act on principles (again, for good or ill) in concert, the fact remains it has always been that singular person's free will to act in groups or not, to follow that group's complete manifesto or not, and to take actions on that group's behalf....

So these groupings would not just be stops on the path to capitalist globalisation, as is the case of ALENA, the free exchange zone between the United States, Canada and Mexico, but they would act as poles of development responding to the real needs of the local populations.