That belief in God is in crisis
needs little argument today.
Not exact matches
No
need to believe in God for this
little verse to apply Proverbs 26: 4 - 7 4 When arguing with fools, don't answer their foolish
arguments, or you will become as foolish as they are.
The
argument is
little more than a pointing to the
need of a principle of limitation.
There is
little need for delusion... and in my experience, our delusions were shattered many times over... so we that are older tend to just ignore the
argument of positioning «Holding beliefs lightly» with «Deluding Oneself».
You guys really
need to monitor these situations a
little more closely if you're going to come up with bullshit
arguments.
When one spouse has had very
little to do with caring for and raising the child or if during the initial separation the child has been made a part of disagreements and
arguments, the court will
need to know that.
Most of the
argument for privatisation revolves around a
need for efficiency, but there is
little evidence of that.
The
argument that we
need to make our welfare state less generous leads us to an end - point of a system which provides no security, which pays far too
little to live on, which traps people in poverty, and which allows costly problems to spiral out of control.
Stevedoring: Far less exotic than it sounds, and I'm sure there's
little need to make a disposal
argument here!
To bring a
little bit of balance to the
argument, I should point out that AAdvantage Miles are still a lot more useful than Avios as you still
need a lot fewer of them to book awards....
I do think that there is a reasonable
argument to be made for using avios and the certificate for people who a.
need to make the trip anyways, and b. don't mind paying a
little extra for the comfort.
The most stupid
argument ever is that «oh i have to get my lazy butt up from the sofa», maybe the nerds
need that
little workout and should buy games in retail stores.
The
argument was that in order for Steam to grow, Valve
needed to step up to the plate and do a
little «Steam cleaning» so to speak.
However, I have very
little idea what the effects of AGW on humanity will be beyond the fact that it is an ecological disaster which can kill lots of people in the developing world (excellent reasons to do whatever it takes to get rid of it, in my opinion) and so I have a problem with responding to the
argument that we
need do nothing because at least as far as the DEVELOPED world is concerned AGW will be at most a nuisance.
I'm a
little disturbed that this
argument needs to be squashed so often.
Even if this lagged or what not CO2 feedback
argument is right (it is too much for my poor
little physicist brain, I would
need an electronic prototype) we must still have a few hundred years from 1950s when we sinned and burned and produced CO2, until we see this glorious lagged or what not feedback operating.
But getting into the meat of Kevin's
argument — that optimizing for social media is becoming more important than optimizing for search engines — I think we
need to look a
little closer.
I don't mind admitting that it was a
little daunting and that I
needed to work closely through the factum several times to grasp the nuances of the
argument.