Sentences with phrase «number of adherents»

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if --(a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

«Blasphemous matter» is defined as matter «that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that

Christianity (both Protestants and Roman Catholics), Hinduism and Buddhism have smaller number of adherents.

Critics say it's just training the parents, but it's being done all over the world and gaining an increasing number of adherents here in the United States.

Jehu treacherously massacred the entire royal family at their residence of Jeareel, as well as vast numbers of their adherents, whom the prophet regarded as idolators.

It took several decades before this message found large numbers of adherents.

If number of adherents and strength of conviceteion were evidence, Allah may well have a leg up on Yahweh / God.

In fact, many of the candidates, which included David Clegg, Antonio Delgado, Brian Flynn, Gareth Rhodes and Pat Ryan, found themselves ranked simultaneously near the top and the bottom at the same time, apparently lending credence to theories that each had a sizeable number of adherents.

A growing number of adherents to the so - called «caveman» diet contend that a return to the hunter - gatherer foods of the Stone Age — heavy on meats, devoid of most grains — could alleviate problems like obesity, type 2 diabetes and many coronary problems.

View what happens in one second, each and every second, on the Internet This is a listing of the major religions of the world, ranked by number of adherents.

«Blasphemous matter» is defined as matter «that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion; and he or she intends, by the publication of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.»

Hayek, subsequently, had a long period in the intellectual wilderness, moving from the UK to the US, and was mostly ignored except by a small number of adherents.

Just over a year ago, Secretary of State Clinton launched an international initiative to promote this approach and it has won an increasing number of adherents, helping to build international attention and action.

Precise statistics on the number of adherents within each church are difficult to come by.

depending on your criteria (if you go by cultural influence or numbers of adherents), a case could be made that it's the clearest book in history.

But can one judge «success» by numbers of adherents?

@SevenPup: «The number of adherents mean nothing.

The number of adherents mean nothing.

The only difference between a cult and a religion is the number of adherents.

This is a listing of the major religions of the world, ranked by number of adherents.

He states, «In the past two decades, this multiple (EM) has acquired a number of adherents among analysts for a number of reasons.»

Since when does the number of adherents to a particular theory or their so - called «credentials» matter in terms of deciding whether a scientific theory is correct or not?