Sentences with phrase «only is it against the law»

Not only is it against the law to drive in Greenfield, WI without basic coverage but it is also irresponsible and dangerous.

Not only is it against the law to drive without it, but it could also end up costing you several thousands of dollars in out of pocket expenses.

Not only is it against the law in Connecticut to drive without Wallingford automobile insurance, but it is also dangerous, irresponsible and could end up costing you several thousands of dollars in medical and property damage expenses.

Not only it's against the law, it could also mean an additional vehicle repair and medical expenses in the event of accidents.

And never drink and drive; not only is it against the law but it can also impair your judgment and impact your reaction time making it much more likely that you will get into an accident.

Not only is it against the law to drive without some level of protection on your vehicle, but it is also dangerous and could end up costing you thousands of dollars in medical fees and vehicle repair expenses.

Not only is it against the law to drive without it, but it can also offer you both on and off road protection from life's unexpected disasters.

Not only it is against the law to drive in the state of Florida without some level of coverage but it is also irresponsible and dangerous.

Not only is it against the law to drive without Clearwater car insurance, but it is also dangerous to both yourself and to other drivers on the road.

Not only is it against the law to drive without Kentucky car insurance but it is also a dangerous practice.

Not only is it against the law in Florida to drive without some level of coverage, but it is also dangerous and could end up costing you thousands of dollars in repairs and medical expenses.

Not exact matches

The law recognizes the corporation as a separate legal entity and any claims that are made against the corporation can only be paid from corporate assets.

Wage theft «is not only against the law but morally and ethically incomprehensible,» says Susan Steinbrecher, author of Heart - Centered Leadership: Lead Well, Live Well.

Currently, it's against the law for companies to punish people for political views in only a handful of jurisdictions, but it should be a bedrock of our republic.

So we have Bernanke essentially bragging that he broke the law and helped create mass unemployment, because it's his only way of defending himself against those Senators who want him to break the law even more egregiously - to create even lower than post-war record low inflation in order to create even higher unemployment.

The bill takes Obama - era sanctions against Russia that are in place under executive orders — that is, directives that only the president has authority to enact and rescind — and officially enshrines them in the law.

Under the financial reform law, all these officers were consolidated into CFPB, whose only mission is to stand up for the consumer against bullying and complex financial institutions.

People who speak against it only finger the ritual laws but that is irrelevant.

I only ask because currently it is against the law to r.ape and murder, although some people find these activities to be enjoyable... by not allowing them to do them aren't we imposing our morality on them?

(btw: Adultery is not against any law and only pertains in a civil court, so your point on that is moot.)

The Prince concluded that «anti-Semitism is not only opposed to religion, it is against all the unwritten divine and human laws.

Let them know that there is only one God and He is not one born of man, One savior and He took all the laws and ordinances that were against us and moved them out of the way, nailing them to His Cross (Col 2:13 - 15).

Laws against polygamy (Morill Laws) were made a requirement for entry into the Union and it was only then, after 5 failed attempts, that the LDS «prophets» had their divine revelation about polygamy being bad — but even then, it was reluctant.

All of a sudden, «The soul knew in its very depths that it was living a lie, and this knowledge, together with the will to perform could only be communicated to the body as a resistance against its law of total obedience to the universal law of the Good and the True.»

On the other hand, many structures and institutions have continued even against a possible opposition by individual authorities, though they were only of human law.

As might be expected, it was only gradually worn down by the steady attrition of increasingly harsh penal laws against the open profession of their religion.

Thus it was with a grim literalness that there was fulfilled, in the life of entire cultures and not only of individual families, the alienation described by the saying of Jesus in the Gospels: «I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter - in - law against her mother - in - law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household» (Matt.10: 35 - 36).

The only thing we argue against is your right to encode into secular law your religious beliefs.

The democracts, who gave us Jim Crow laws, the KKK, colored only restrooms now want to rebrand and act like it's the GOP that is against blacks, latins etc.

Although both «lungs» of the Church of the Christ have experienced the tuberculosis of iconoclasm (indeed, the very term «iconoclasm» comes from the struggle of the Greek Church against the attempts of a Greek emperor to ban icons), the Greek version of iconoclasm was much influenced not only by imperial fiat but also by the surrounding sea of Muslim culture, whereas the iconoclasm of Western Puritanism was born out of Calvin's reliance on Old Testament Law.

But the significance of such a law is not only that it puts the coercive power of the state against the unjust discriminator, but that it puts the moral power of the state against it also, T. V. Smith's statement that laws «represent the maximum of private conscience which can at any time become social fact.»

Equality in the country is sometimes taken by Christians as prejudice against Christians on occasion, but only because the church has lost much of its influence (understandably, considering) on laws and government.

As far as I'm aware of, the only time Jesus pointed to the Mosaic law was when people first pointed to it in judgement against others....

(Israelite law forbade the judge to take away a poor man's cloak; it was his only protection against the night's cold.)

The only guaranteed way to prevent medical martyrdom is to maintain laws against assisted suicide and euthanasia.

For theology, clinging desperately to the supernatural as its only way of keeping God, had fought against one realm of law after another, even fighting the law of gravitation, until, beaten everywhere else, it was left with comets as about the only things that had not been captured by law.

Not only that, the federal RFRA does not protect against state laws that infringe upon religious liberty, and state religious protections are now vociferously opposed by progressive political adherents and large corporations — as Indiana discovered recently when it was threatened with economic ruin for attempting to pass an RFRA that extended to the operation of businesses.

The law is only one of several imperfect and more or less external ways of defending what is better in life against what is worse.

If you're a scientist, you know molecules interacting in space with a volume the size of the universe even in a vacuum is not only improbable but it goes against every law of thermodynamics.

Lets us look at the truth of scripture and how Grace is really only applied to the repentant sinner, one who sees their sin for what it is and knows that they have sinned against a Holy God and that the works of the Law can not save them.

Having said all that, the Muslims do have the right to create a center at a place of their own choosing, regardless of the noises made by Newt and others promoters of stupidity in America, long as they are not promoting laws that are not only against the constitution but against the dignity of what we know as humans, we can not legalize any killing fields.

Someone can not be a Catholic and be pro-choice and pro other wicked forms of «freedom and rights» which are not only against God's teaching but are also against laws of nature.

They said that women and laymen could preach, that the Church of Rome, being corrupt, was not the head of the Catholic Church, that only priests and bishops who lived as did the Apostles were to be obeyed, that prayers for the dead were useless, that sacraments administered by unworthy clergy were of no effect, that taking life is against God's law, that every lie is a deadly sin, and that oaths, as in courts, are clearly contrary to Christ's command.

We live in a very self - centered narcissitic society where people do what they want, and the only bad consequence is getting caught if it's against the law.

The Vietnam war was not only a gross miscalculation, politically and militarily, but a moral wrong inflicted by a massive use of cruel weapons forbidden by international law, mostly against poor and innocent civilians.

I don't think it's so much about the levites being paid for their service it's about us doing what's right toward Pastors that must feed and tend to the flock of GOD if GOD has called them.JESUS even said in luke 10:7 that the laborers are worthy of their wages.In luke 8 1 - 4 it's says even JESUS HIMSELF recieved financial support from the women who ministered to him with their possessions.Now most people today would say he should have been ashamed of taking money from those poor women but JESUS accepted their support and they was blessed for sowing onto the LORD»S work.1 Corinthains 9:1 - 15 says dint muzzle the ox while it tread out the grain was GOD talking about oxes no he was talking about those who labor in the ministry.Who goes to war at their own expense.Or who goes to war but pay for their clothes, guns, etc.No one because the goverment if that country provide these things because of the soilders service.Who plants a vineyard and don't eat from it.Who tends a flock and don't drink the milk of it.I think it's just spiritual sense to support a pastor that's teaching you the word, casting out devils, laying hands and healing is manifesting in people lived, going to hospitails, prisons, and house calls to pray for the sick and shut in, going to graduations and funnerals, praying and fasting for himself and the flock.I think a person who think a pastor shouldn't be paid for their service either don't know they need to be paid and need to be taught or they are demonic in their thinking and either hate GOD, PASTORS, AND GOD»S PEOPLE.Why do nt you hear people saying anything against the dope dealers, strip clubs, dope houses, liquor stores, etc.It's only when people give into the LORD»S work that evil minded or misinformed people have a problem with it.No sir we don't have to use the old testament to show that we should support out pastors.You don't use the law, love tells me to support the pastor.Under the new testament LOVE is the greatest of all.Love for GOD and man.If GOD asked for 10 percent under the law to support the levites who didn't have all the responsibilities of Pastor today.Church rent, gas for vans of thd church, insurance fir the church and church vehicles, feeding and clothing the poor, light, gas, and water bill, mantience on the church or vehicles, not to mention the Pastor own house, cars, children, insurance, etc.If would be foolish for one to think that a pastor should take care if his house and GODS HOUSE without people supporting the work of the KINGDOM OF GOD.If we love GOD we are going to support HIS KINGDOM and HIS PASTOR.If under the law GOD asked for 10 percent how much should we give under the LOVE COVENANT?Example I love my wife and if I had 300 dollars I would surley give her more that 10 percent which would be 30 dollars because I love her.The law says you must give LOVE says I chose to give because I love GOD and man.Again we don't have to use the law just love and spiritual sense because hate and a carnal senses will not understand.Now I have given you scriptures please do the same when you respond not your opinion.Please respond right away I await your answer.GOD BLESS.

In 1994, the Court not only allowed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes to be applied against anti-abortion demonstrators, putting them in the same category with mobsters, but also allowed to stand a Florida law restricting the speech of pro-life, but not pro-choice, demonstrators in the vicinity of abortion clinics.

An in Australia, new country of origin labelling laws are to be introduced in July of next year that aim to not only clarify the extent to which foodstuffs originate in Australia but to leverage significant fines against non-compliant producers.

See also Lucy Barbour, «Competition watchdog ACCC head Rod Simms (sic) denies claims an «effects test» would be «economically dangerous» (ABC Rural, 18 August 2014), in which the ACCC Chairman defends the ACCC's proposed effects test (and is also reported as saying that the current case against Coles was brought under the unconscionable conduct provisions rather than under s 46 because the misuse of market power prohibitions is a law that exists only between competitors...)

Professor Christine Parker, an expert in competition law from Monash University, says that this current investigation «only treats the symptoms and diverts attention away from the real cause of the problem: supermarket power»; and that because of the way the legal provisions are worded, it will be very hard for the ACCC to win any case against the supermarkets.