Sentences with phrase «points of discussion for»

Well researched and spirited, this features innumerable points of discussion for young readers.

In the final days of the session, the numbers nine and 10 became key points of discussion for Cuomo's Women's Equality Act.

Despite this, The Witch also happens to contain some remarkable points of discussion for Christ - followers that are as grueling as they are significant.

This raises a key point of discussion for the digital currency community: should Bitcoin protect its «brand,» or is reputation damage an unavoidable risk in the decentralized landscape?

Having the most moving parts and playing such a critical role in power generation, gearboxes continue to be a main point of discussion for the industry.

Whenever the topic of SEO is brought up, high - quality content is a main point of discussion for your legal site.

Not exact matches

A White House official pointed to trade as part of a «bigger picture» for the economy, with cabinet - level discussions described as «deliberative» and the President focused on doing right by American workers.

The first five or so seasons of HBO's show contained plot points from George R.R. Martin's «A Song of Ice and Fire» novels, and for the most part book readers kept those details from leaking into mainstream discussions.

The starting point for the discussion was five specific global risks: Resistance to life saving medicine Accelerating transport emissions Loss of ocean biodiversity Global food crisis A Generation Wasted These risk represent a pressure -LSB-...]

The intent is not to re-create the discussion but to capture the key points and the specific commitments for each topic, so that non-attendees have a sense of what happened and all have a record of who will take further action.

The starting point for the discussion was five specific global risks: Resistance to life saving medicine Accelerating transport emissions Loss of ocean biodiversity Global food crisis A Generation Wasted These risk represent a -LSB-...]

In a press release by PETA, the animal rights group noted that in discussions with Tesla, PETA pointed out the possibility for the electric car company to reduce its carbon footprint through the usage of vegan leather.

A whole discussion can be had about the effect of the Bitcoin network and value on the interest and price of alternative cryptocurrencies, but the point is that for the purpose of privacy it can be relatively easy and cheap to move into Monero and back out in Bitcoin, or at some exchanges, directly into cash.

So this gets very technical of various points but I think it's important for people to hear because they can really quickly learn how real this stuff is at the start of our mastermind discussion.

At the time of an IPO and subsequent underwritten public offerings, underwriters will have the ability to dictate whether investors are allowed to sell, which makes the registration rights negotiated at the time of the venture financing a mere starting point for discussions with the company and the underwriters.

Jay introduces the guests for the program, gives updated information on the sponsors and talks about some of the discussion points for the day's program.

To discover what a prospective customer's pain points might be, use your understanding of the common pain points that your existing customers already have and frame the discussion in a way that allows for the prospective to customer to either agree or disagree that they have these problems.

And considering the impact of religion on society (good or bad) I would argue it is not a moot point for discussion period.

For the purposes of this discussion that is taken as a premise since the OP seemed willing to concede it for his / her poiFor the purposes of this discussion that is taken as a premise since the OP seemed willing to concede it for his / her poifor his / her point.

I'm also going to add this; in earlier comments you raised some legitimate points for discussion about how the British Mandate was apportioned, which is a huge part of the whole quagmire and the legality of it all is a huge, tangled, convoluted mess.

Whenever a discussion of alcohol comes up among members of my congregation, and someone mentions the story about Jesus turning water into wine for his first public miracle, one point is inevitably made: that the wine back then was watered down so much it had little or no alcoholic content, making it barely more than grape juice.

Without sharing these words, of similar but slightly different meaning, between the two groups there would be no point for discussion of actual practical day to day and legal issues, so it will remain that way.

, avoids discussion of many moral sticking points of the next few millennia (even though he knew in advance they'd be sticking points and could have provided clearer guidance), and then makes one of the central points of the entire story — and his entire reason for being here really — a personal sacrifice that is so va.gue that no one can even explain how or what was, in fact, sacrificed.

He concludes with an important point: ``... the Reformers» insistence on the authority of scripture made several important points, but left many other matters open for further discussion.

Had those situations been addressed more directly the last time they erupted, they might not even be under discussion now or maybe wouldn't seem so volatile for the recipients of Julie McMahon's pointed narrative and challenges.

You refuse to acknowledge just some basic undeniable points of reference for discussion.

I greatly welcome this turn in the discussion, for this latter question was also the theme of my own sermon, and it was only because the former arose in «Meeting Point» and was seized upon by many of my correspondents that I have had to devote a disproportionate amount of space to the historical problem.

For instance, when in the course of discussion it is clear that the one receiving such admonishment actually disagrees with the point being made, then continued dogging attempts to force the other party to change does indeed become «manipulative coercion».

In the evening of the same day this sermon was the subject of a discussion in the B.B.C.'s program, «Meeting Point», in which I was questioned by some members of the morning congregation under the chairmanship of Canon W. E. Purcell, editor of this Dialogue, and at that time the Religious Broadcasting Organizer for the Midland Region of the B.B.C..

For an illuminating discussion of these points see Arthur Foster, «Exploring Conflict Dynamics through Non-Verbal Communication,» C.T.S. Register, May, 1969.

Burhoe's point is that if cultural evolution is the subject for discussion, then the religious traditions whose wisdom has survived millennia of selective pressures can be left out of the discussion only at the cost of scientific adequacy and competency.

This time discussion guides and questions for each of the eight points were included in the Sunday bulletin.

For instance, in a discussion of apartheid, David Field remarks: «From a Christian point of view, it is important to examine the case for apartheid in some detail... because among its strongest supporters it numbers Christians who claim to have tested their attitudes and opinions by the standards of Scripture» (Free to Do Right [InterVarsity, 1976], p. 1For instance, in a discussion of apartheid, David Field remarks: «From a Christian point of view, it is important to examine the case for apartheid in some detail... because among its strongest supporters it numbers Christians who claim to have tested their attitudes and opinions by the standards of Scripture» (Free to Do Right [InterVarsity, 1976], p. 1for apartheid in some detail... because among its strongest supporters it numbers Christians who claim to have tested their attitudes and opinions by the standards of Scripture» (Free to Do Right [InterVarsity, 1976], p. 19).

Sometimes it is hard to discern the systematic function of a particular passage, while at the same point one looks in vain for a discussion of other questions that are necessarily related to the overall structure of his enterprise.

This seems to me to be the whole point behind Dewey's ideal of a democratic community and is perhaps what Rorty had in mind when he called for free discussion.

The discussion, I hope, illustrates my major point that when you ask the meaning of a doctrine or, in other words, what was the insight or truth of experience that those who formulated these doctrines wanted to safeguard, you find yourself grappling with them with concepts almost too difficult for words.

Now, if we accept «being opposed to war for any reason» as a working definition, I would say, I do agree with some of your points in your discussion with MarkR, but disagree with much of your basic premises.

Unless the discussion in the preceding pages has entirely failed to make its point, it will be plain that what is being proposed in this book is (as I have said) a «de-mythologizing» of the inherited notions of «life after death», with their (to many of us) impossible assertions; and also the «re-mythologizing» — or better, the re-conceiving — of their implicit intention so that we may have a valid way of affirming the value and worth of human existence, its significance and importance for God, and its preservation in God as a reality which has affected the divine life and in God has acquired an enduring quality which nothing can take away.

But before we come to that discussion, it will be useful for us to turn our attention to the question of «resurrection» — first, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, about which so much of the earliest Christian writing found in the New Testament, and so much of the Christian experience of discipleship, turns; and second, to consider the point of the continuing Christian affirmation that those who have responded to the event of Christ are themselves made «sharers in Christ's resurrection».

These discussions will of necessity be brief, but it is my hope that they will nevertheless provide an adequate overview and point the way for further development of these ideas.

But permit me to mention some of the salient points which are particularly relevant for our discussion:

The point is not that the preaching is to be a discussion of moral issues, such as might be entirely appropriate in a lecture or discussion - group; rather, the preaching is both a challenge to and a demand for a response which will represent in act that requirement of love in action in the world.

For a thorough discussion of this passage from a pacifist point of view, see John Howard Yoder, The Polities of Jesus (Grand Rapids.

In any event, the point of this chapter, intended to prepare the way for further discussion of what I have styled «another» (and I am convinced a better) theological approach, is simply to insist that we can only be loyal to our ancestors in the Christian tradition, but above all loyal to the chief stress in the faith which that tradition has conveyed to us, if and when and as we are ready to put stress on love's centrality — and to use that as our key to the whole theological enterprise.

In a poll taken by Christianity Today in 1957, for example, among members of the Protestant clergy who chose to call themselves conservative or fundamental, 48 % affirmed that belief in Scripture's inspiration also demanded a commitment to its inerrancy, while 52 % said they were either unsure of the doctrine of inerrancy or rejected it outright.1 Discussion within evangelicalism concerning the inspiration of Scripture has usually focused on this point: whether or not Scripture is inerrant.

The NATO essay points again to the fact that, whether the issue under discussion is welfare policy or foreign policy, what we consistently find in the work of Irving Kristol is a consideration of public life and governing from the standpoint of the individual soul» and, by the same token, a consideration of the need to foster the right kinds of virtues in individual souls in order for the most desirable regimes to be successful.

I have conceded this point to you for the purpose of this discussion, simply to show that it doesn't matter, but I do not concede that point at all.

This is, possibly, the most vexing issue raised by an agenda - setting book that will be the starting point of discussion and debate for years to come.

Let me digress for a moment from the main course of the discussion to observe that this last point must be kept in mind as an answer to a possible objection to Peirce's account.

This last point is suggested in a number of Peirce's discussions, particularly in his accounts of the function of the sciences (see, for instance, 1.191) as well as in his references to the goal of rational conduct which is the summum bonum (e.g., 5.4 - 5, 5.433).