Sentences with phrase «not about labels»

There's a lot of pressure to wear new designer pieces and trends, but you know what, style is not about labels, it's about what you do with the clothing, styling them in a way that's unique to you and that's captivating and inspiring and I feel you did just that!

«This is not about party politics, this is not about labels, this is about people, it's about public safety, it's about the ability to bring issues to the public and let them decide who should lead as their chief law enforcement officer for the next four years,» he told a crowd that included state Republican chairman Ed Cox, state senator Marty Golden, and assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis.

I'd recommend closing, OR, reworking to ask not about labels and individuals, but basically what agreements or disagreements exist between conservative and transhumanist philosophy and approaches.

It is not about labels but substance; not whether one cost so much or played for a certain club but whether one is doing the job.

This leopard print blanket from Urban Outfitters proves it is not about the label or how expensive it is but HOW YOU WEAR IT!!!

At the end of the day style is not about a label.

It's not about the label, rather how we each approach the call to get more out of this one and only life.

I believe that counseling is not about labeling problems, it is about developing coping skills, gaining self awareness and self understanding.

Professor Dissanayake says it's important for parents to understand that an early diagnosis is not about labelling the child.

Not exact matches

While Soylent wants consumers who aren't avid readers of nutrition labels to be able to understand the concept behind the company's products, it's not looking to do an about - face.

In June, the former Secretary of State said that she doesn't believe there is «anything controversial» about being labeled a feminist.

«You're paying for privilege and brand and label that makes you feel good and better about yourself,» he adds, «but doesn't actually affect the two things that matter most which is your health and the environment.»

«We didn't wake up in a cold sweat thinking about labels,» quips Max Winograd when asked how he and two Brown University classmates, Ben Lux and Mike Woods, decided to start NuLabel.

Lovato hasn't spoken out about the photos or confirmed that she's romantically involved with her, but she didn't keep silent when critics knocked her — and now she's argued that she shouldn't have to «label» herself on Twitter.

About 80 % of Aritzia's merchandise is made up of these in - house labels; the 20 % the company doesn't make are mostly popular denim brands like J Brand, Citizens of Humanity and 7 For All Mankind.

A simple «GMO» or «non-GMO» label actually doesn't tell consumers anything important about that food and how it compares to organic or conventionally farmed foods.

The decision to label Cohn a «globalist» on his way out the door is, at a minimum, a suggestion that he lost not a specific policy argument about steel but a much larger argument about the overall direction of the Republican Party.

So maybe the Wildrose and Derek Fildebrandt doesn't really care as much about the «family farm» as they do for the larger commercial agriculture operation that employs workers but still wants to be labelled a «family farm».

A major source of complaints about brokers where they get labelled as scam are dissatisfied clients who probably did not get speedy responses to the most basic of issues.

According to Bain, while Chinese shoppers consider famous labels, they don't necessarily think about any single brand when they make a purchase — leaving plenty of room for brand owners, both foreign and domestic, to cultivate stronger ties through effective marketing.

As investor confidence soared, a fad surfaced that there were about 50 well - known companies (IBM, McDonald's, Pfizer, etc) which were labeled can't miss investments that would continue to grow their dividend and offer healthy stock price appreciation.

I am so sorry that you have been told / taught such awful things about Jesus, but whether or not you believe He is fully man and also fully God, there is more than enough proof historically and in present scripture to show that labeling Him as a mysogonist and an advocate for murder is a drastically false account of who He is and what He stood for.

Too often, as well, believers will label something as being «in God's hands now» when they are entirely capable of doing something about it, but don't have the motivation to actually do it, see?

Just like Starflyer, the label's not huge, but it's big enough that people know about it, and it sells records and can pay for itself.

This might be hard to understand for an American Christian but what it takes for someone to battle an entire western nation (in a right or wrong way) in the way that Osama did, must be for fame or for money or financial gain (like the US would), after seeing it wasn't about money they label such a person who kills innocent people insane.

I am not defined by such labels as atheist or believer, they are just possible words to describe some very miniscule part of what I happen to think about a very basic level of the topic.

If you can not prove something about the past, it is not science, no matter what label you give it.

People always talk about «label interest,» and you have that from here or there, but we started to not pay attention to any of that unless we felt that interest was something that was legitimate and real and it was someone who also shared our interests.

I'm speaking about my own faith only: To become a Christian, it must be your own choice.No else can decide this life style for you.I know many in the past and present have thought raising a child under the Christian label will save them for hell but in actual reality, the choice is their own not their parents etc.This life (being Christian) goes deeper than just believing.You have to consider this yourself.Many today do not even consider Christ as their savior because they just believe what their church or family says.

How about Hitler, he was ü Content not labels, folks, you've had thousands of years to figure that out.

You're obviously not an ultra-orthodox Jew so why should anyone care what you think needs to be labeled kosher or not seeing as you don't know the first thing about kashruth.

We see municipal and school authorities, for example, scrambling to mediate conflicts about gender - neutral bathrooms and shared locker rooms, fearful of being labeled as bigots, or sued, if they do not comply.

I know that I see elements of divine around me in things and in ways that others don't, including other religious people... And as long as different religions and even sects constantly argue about what god truly is, and as long as they come up with different asnwers, then I have to say that the spiritual elements of our universe simply manifest differently for different folks, including not at all for some... as with those who label themselves as athiest...

It's also similar to an argument I made about trying not to put God in a box: pushing that sentiment to the extreme can be a form of putting God in a box labeled «not the box.»

On the whole, Quakers don't worry about boundaries and labels much.

What I don't get is, being critical of Zionistic policies, agenda or people is quickly labeled as «anti-semitic» and is even considered illegal in countries like Germany, yet a bigoted person like Geert Wilders (who has not once consulted any expect or scholar on Islam) can make a video which literally embodies everything that hate, racism, and ignorance is about, and yet get away with it where the court recognizes it as «denigrating» but not «illegal»!?

By taking on complex characters who don't easily fit any predetermined bubble, Plaza is helping the rest of us feel better about our own lack of labels.

but on the third day using his Power of Resurrection rose from the dead to claim his seat next to God in heaven, I mean next to himself since he was also God and then told the masses that he died for their sins, though oddly enough being God he could have simply absolved them of their sins and he really didn't die because he lives and is coming back to judge man based upon the original sins... but not sure if that would work since man can clearly kill a God with wood and nails... I know, I know confusing and likely to be labeled heresy... but debates about nomenclature and religion... i mean story telling... just don't mix.

Or we are talking about the Pope, who isn't part of american politics and thus it would be hard to apply our labels to him.

The term «Atheist» is a label used by Christian only, not by people who see the fantasy (not necessarily the folly) that this stories are all about.

AND please don't splutter into your latte about the NT being «hearsay» — The Apochryphal gospels were written 150 - 400 years after Jesus and they are labelled as such.

In her view, the labels we use do not express, but rather distort, the most important things we can know and say about our own sexuality and human sexuality in general.

In my view, the labels we use do not express, but rather distort, the most important things we can know and say about our own sexuality and human sexuality in general.

BARBARIC??? Before we label «Barbaric» other countries system we should see how «Barbaric» is for the US, corporate and financial system NOT to give a damn about the real American working people who support [by being enslaved and blackmailed] the wealth of those who, instead, destroyed the economy and what was hardly achieved in 60 years!

It always amazes me how many people will get so worked up about any «non-believer», which is what I tend to label myself as, simply saying that he «thinks that God and the Devil aren't real.»

Yes, there is something out there, but until I die or see it with my own eyes or heart, I'm not going to make up rules about it and put a label on it.

If we have to conjure labels to distinguish between competing interests, then how about just going by the «haves» and the «have - nots»?

Lukewarm Christian is just a label to say: «Hey, I want eternal life, but I don't want to please God and I want to live my own sinful way, that way, I'm still Christian and I don't have to worry about the consequences.»

Now certainly, the concept of false teaching and unsound doctrine is found elsewhere in Scripture, and the term «false prophets» which is also found in 2 Peter 2:1 is also found in other passages, but the disparaging label of «false teacher» which is so frequently tossed about these days, is not a common term in Scripture.

You may not WANT it to be this way, simply because it labels athiest in the same manner as thiests, but that's not going to change the fact that an athiest has a BELIEF about something dealing with a deity just as much as a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, etc. has a BELIEF about something dealing with a deity.