Sentences with phrase «other wrong view»

Not exact matches

We, on the other hand, view it with hope: because more than anything, the events of the past few days show that the truth is getting out — the truth that capital markets simply can not exist under the authoritarian rule of central planners, the truth that the stock market is a casino in which the best one can hope for a quick flip, and finally the truth that our entire socio - economic regime, whose existence has been predicated by borrowing from the uncreated wealth of the future, and where accumulated debt could be wiped out at the flip of a switch if things go wrong in the process obliterating the welfare of billions (of less than 1 % ers), is one big lie.

so, the only time attempting to foist your views onto others is wrong is when it's done forcibly??

There is no critical comments about any other religion, any controversial views, lifestyles which are all beyond criticism and will be «politically wrong».

It is what has lead me to my veiw that Atheism as a religion, the passion most Atheist have for their point of view from the start you may not fall in this category but I'm sure you know someone that does.The same applies to Christians that freak out on someone and start forcing their view on others, I see that as wrong also if someone asks or brings the debate to you then by all means debate but why be rude how does it help?

Regardless of your beliefs and views, is it not tasteless for CNN to run this as their lead story on Easter morning??? Americans are appalled by anything done to insult Islam believers, so why is this felt to be appropriate??? There is nothing wrong with the article, but its timing makes it a poor and inflammatory choice of journalism, and would be taken as «persecution» if was directed toward any other belief system.

There are some issues that get all the attention because different societies view some behavior as wrong while other are ok with it (e.g. role of women in the society, same se.x relationships, etc.).

There is nothing inherently wrong with pointing out that other Bible teachers and scholars agree with your views, but the trouble comes in when some people seem ignorant of the fact that there are many good and respectable Bible teachers and scholars who disagree.

You know NOTHING of my spiritual condition or journey yet you believe YOU and YOU ALONE know what is wrong with me and obviously EVERY other person who dares challenge your views.

We were isolated and even found ourselves asking priests their views on HV before Confession — if they were wrong on that they could be wrong on other things.

Of course this is just another case where you think your church has it right, and all other Christians who don't hold the same view are wrong.

Lastly, I can honestly admit that if proven wrong today, tomorrow, or in the future and someone gave me empiracle evidence that god exists, that gravity is not constant on earth, that the sun IS actually revolving around us and not the other way around, I would be more than happy to revise my current view of the universe around me and change accordingly.

I would not accuse him of «complicity in the explicit slander»» his words about Obama's view of America» of the Church for saying things other Catholics, including me sometimes, find wrong.

The reality is that his view of right and wrong will not coincide with other believers from times, or even the Bible.

To argue that one view — your own, for example — is objectively right and others wrong, you have to present evidence.

Indeed, in a world of many points of view, there is a deep philosophical problem involved in trying to defend the claim that one point of view is right and all others wrong when fundamental beliefs and values are involved.

Pluralism would be no problem if we had the assurance and certainty that our own view was the absolutely right one and all others wrong.

We are two nations: one concentrated on rights and laws, the other on rights and wrongs; one radically individualistic and dedicated to the actualized self, the other communal and invoking the common good; one viewing law as the instrument of the will to power and license, the other affirming an objective moral order reflected in a Constitution to which we are obliged; one given to private satisfaction, the other to familial responsibility; one typically secular, the other typically religious; one elitist, the other populist.

Hence the freedom of the Christian is, in the last resort, bound to be the holy foolishness which is the true wisdom of God; he must believe that the other wills the good even where, according to the Christian view, this will is realized in a wrong and threatening way.

The view that it is morally wrong to have nice things when others are starving often accompanies thinking about responsibilities to the poor — but when other kinds of religious involvement are taken into account, this view becomes relatively insignificant as a determining factor.

The Bible does not prohibit slavery and God allowed it to begin and continue which I do not see as approval of such a wrong way of viewing others.

The fact that different schools of thought have come to different conclusions after reading the same bible does nt seem to register with many christians who effectively hold to the position «My doctrine is what the bible teaches so the other view is wrong».

The intolerance of other views or interpretations proves what is wrong with organised religion

Furthermore, the entire point of my post was to show that even though I am a Christian and do not agree with the atheist view of God (which is to say the idea of the absense of God), I STILL support this soldier in their right to attend the ceremony and NOT have to bow their head, and believe that any Christian or other person who would force this soldier to do so by threat of removal from the ceremony, is just plain wrong.

This means that, like the other evangelists, he repeatedly states that the disciples misunderstood Jesus during his ministry; unlike them, he specifically indicates that their eschatological views were wrong.

Just be good people and respect others views then there won't be no right or wrong.

Having said that, I will show in the next few posts that the process and standards of Canonization undermines nearly everything else we evangelical Christians believe about the Bible, and so we must either change our view on some of these other things (such an inspiration and inerrancy), or we must decide that the process of Canonization was wrong.

When church is primarily viewed through the lens of an event we consume, it's a whole lot easier to label the «other» out there and how wrong they are.

Avoiding commitment as to any specific attitude which the church and Christian men ought to adopt toward war when war comes, the conference report contented itself with exhibiting the various views which Christians actually hold on that subject and with saying that while the church could neither affirm that any one of these was right and the others wrong nor acquiesce in the permanent continuance of these differences, it should promote the study of the problem with a view to a better understanding of the purpose of God.

Each point of view is right in what it includes but wrong to the extent that it leaves out what the other two are saying.

I don't impose my views on others and I never tell someone that their beliefs are wrong.

It's a shame really how people are so plastic over here.We seem to change our views so easily.Why can't people just make up their minds?It's like people don't have stance.As I've been saying and will keep saying we have many good players but as good as they are they're overrated.We've just compromised as a club.There are problems in every single role in the team, from defence to attack.Yet these problems will constantly be ignored.Some players are cleary not good enough but say it and the stats lovers will come out.The main problem wrong with the team is the centre.The other problem is Wenger and his misuse of players.I for one don't really rate Ramsey - Xhaka partnership in a sense that it's defensively weak with Xhaka not good enough defensively and Ramsey very inconsistent.The only player excellent defensively in the centre in Arsenal's team is Coquelin and I think he should be playing though many won'tsee why.Look how easily the balls went through the midfield.Coquelin should be partnered with another CM in our current team.People shouldn't deceive themselves Xhaka that Xhaka isn't a DM.He's just not good defensively admit it.We need a DM more than a CM in my opinion or a hybrid like Sanches or Jankto.

If you are open to the differences in the culture and lifestyle and not fixated on diseases and other things that can go wrong, your children will enjoy an unbiased view, free of fear and disdain of a fascinating country and you will not regret taking them there.

Firstly, aesthetically the navy material faded so it looks old and work when it's not, this happened within a couple of months, the green dot where you know to push the brake release forward rubbed off within seconds so now when others try to help me out when pushing the buggy they push the release the wrong way, needless to say the brake mechanism is now half broken, the canopy struts are awkward and don't flip up or down evenly and often pull out of their sockets, this is super annoying, the seat has a flimsy strap underneath supporting the legs, on occasion this has undone and I've found my infant in the storage section underneath hanging on by a tether, bad bad design, the viewing window on the canopy is only good on a non windy day.

and the argument that «the Labour party's final abandonment of the «politics of conscience», of the protest tradition, and its full transformation into a party of executive authoritarianism» much overstated and, in my view, wrong - though others inside and outside the party might particularly agree with you.

I believe that such appeals carry grave threats to democratic discourse, and I think it wrong that faith groups, which in the United States and here enjoy significant hidden subsidies from other taxpayers, should award themselves a special right to influence the law and public policy and seek to impose their views on others who disagree with them.»

In the case where a reviewer is clearly wrong, politely approaching a program officer with clear evidence of how his views are not correct and [are] inconsistent with the views of others is probably the best approach.

But research by Jason Ransom of Colorado State University and others has shown that this male - centric view is wrong.

«Perhaps what we think we know about the way we view other people is wrong.

It's funny — these issues are like religion for many in that they believe what they believe and all other views are just plain wrong.

I personally believe that it is bad if we begin to view other lineages as» lacking» or «wrong».

Many singles become caught in an other - directed view of dating, directing their efforts toward finding the right guy, only to become frustrated and jaded when they meet a bunch of Mr. Wrongs.

They spend their time worrying their prose style just doesn't hack it, their story - telling chops are weak, they've chosen the wrong point of view, they should have gone with the other story idea, etc. etc..

There is so much wrong with this book from a technical point of view that I almost hesitate to touch on the other problem I had with it almost from the beginning.

It might be plausibly maintained that in almost every one of the leading controversies, past or present, in social philosophy, both sides were in the right in what they affirmed, though wrong in what they denied; and that if either could have been made to take the other's views in addition to its own, little more would have been needed to make its doctrine correct.

The rub is, the version of mobipocket files downloaded via Amazon.com is an encrypted version of mobipocket called AZW that can't be viewed on other devices (but, please correct me if I'm wrong).

Analyze where things can go wrong, and where other parties may have a different view than you do.

Wexboy, Reference your 30th Sept current summary in KR1, From my point of view I am in awe of your 2 % holding in KR1, The figures are very compelling and staggering in forward potential, I might have this projection all wrong but here goes, As of today 22/10/17 we have an sp of 7p, quoting your average roi on holdings within the table we have x 15 within the last 7 months giving us a current book to value of x 3.5 = sp 24.5 p, Should we assume another x 15 (I appreciate the x 15 was on the back of Ethereum, s metaphoric rise and other crypto, s tracking) over the next 12 months and and sp follows suit to say 100p, THEN we factor in a us listing and as you state the us markets award much higher book value with the average p / b in the blockchain cc sector of x 20, Then we are looking at (without dilution) in 12 months - = MC of # 2 BILLION = # 20 SP AS you state in your summary the figures are staggering so is the ablove a realistic projected mc based on the last 7 months growth and returns on investments made in CC ICO, s?

Don't get me wrong I F»n love the prime games but other M's view point brought it back to its Snes feel w / 2.5 style.

The fact that you can view the runs of others in every single mode just by heading to the leaderboards will also be appreciated by many, and might even help you out if you are wondering where you are going wrong in your own gameplay sessions.

He instead used four symbols: the triangle represents the player's view point, the square represents a piece of paper (for menus or other in - game documents), and the O and X buttons respectively represent «yes / right» or «no / wrong» options — this was reversed in Western territories, so that the X button became the de facto «move ahead / action» option.