Sentences with phrase «public freedom for»

Not exact matches

I don't want public attention because I don't want the story to be about me... I want it to be about what the US government is doing... I'm willing to sacrifice all of that because I can't in good conscience allow the US government to destroy privacy, internet freedom and basic liberties for people around the world with this massive surveillance machine they're secretly building.

Wells Fargo also revealed that it had submitted request for some Valeant's documents under the Freedom of Information Act, which will become public May 24.

Just this week, Will Carty, manager of public policy for Twitter, wrote a blog post praising reclassification as «critical to American economic aspirations and our nation's global competitiveness» with «important implications for freedom of expression.»

Washington, DC — Internet Association today announced that Senators Cory Gardner (R - CO) and Maria Cantwell (D - WA) will be honored with the 2018 Internet Freedom Award, Internet Association's highest recognition for excellence in public service.

But if businesses take advantage of this new freedom, the public probably won't know it, because it's easy for them to legally hide their political spending.

As the candle of hope for a free and public internet begins to flicker in the winds of corporate takeover, Coin Center represents a vanguard for securing the freedoms of the next evolution of the internet.

In addition, according to Public Citizen, Kellyane Conway, the media face for Trump, formerly consulted for Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners.

Public Eye has been supported for the past two years by a small group of readers who have made monthly $ 10 contributions to keep me filing freedom of information requests, poring over government reports and holding politicians of all stripes to account.

Throughout the past few years, the public's demand for financial anonymity and freedom has catalyzed...

While judicial review is vital to safeguard our constitutional freedoms, a degree of moral and philosophical discussion flowing from constitutional litigation can not justify the costs that overreaching judicial rights declaration has for public debate and democratic governance.

In our time and place the media will almost always be on the side of those who claim conscientious freedom; they will seldom be able to understand sympathetically a church's need for a magisterial voice to articulate and sustain its public teaching.

The pope insists, as part of his demand for truth, that the Church «has a public role over and above her charitable and educational activities: all the energy she brings to the advancement of humanity and of universal fraternity is manifested when she is able to operate in a climate of freedom.

Bush gave what was, in many ways, a noble speech, but it was lacking in its concern for the order and public safety that make political freedom possible and bearable.

That is so because our constituting purpose» to advance a religiously informed public philosophy for a society of freedom and virtue» requires a secure partnership between Christians and Jews.

In Harper's, Kazin identifies «Arendt as a scholar who writes with deeply moving personal urgency about politics in its classic signification» when it meant no context for office or administration but the public realm in which alone, through action, man knew freedom.»

Freedom of expression is allowing you and anyone to stand up in public places and denounce being gay as terrible for mankind.

«In the past, they [Syrian Christians] have had great outpouring of piety in the public squares on Easter,» said Nina Shea, director of the Center for Religious Freedom at the Hudson Institute.

For all that the neoconservatives have said publicly about their vision of American power, a coherent narrative of the development of their policy has been needed, and Dorrien provides that account impressively He reveals that the purported reasons for the Iraq invasion (defending America from weapons of mass destruction and spreading democracy and freedom) were a mere gloss intended for public consumptiFor all that the neoconservatives have said publicly about their vision of American power, a coherent narrative of the development of their policy has been needed, and Dorrien provides that account impressively He reveals that the purported reasons for the Iraq invasion (defending America from weapons of mass destruction and spreading democracy and freedom) were a mere gloss intended for public consumptifor the Iraq invasion (defending America from weapons of mass destruction and spreading democracy and freedom) were a mere gloss intended for public consumptifor public consumption.

Far from compromising human freedom, then, the substantive goal of a maximal public world calls for maximal human self - determination.

This was done in a nation with a strong established church, so that the freedom enabled by religious toleration at its origins was a freedom of private worship and belief for dissenters, but not quite a freedom of common action in the public square.

He also felt that debate over the famous Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom in 1785 formed the essential background to the First Amendment, and that the Virginia Statute was consciously written to guarantee full participation in public life on equal terms by «the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination» (V: 85)

The exercise of rights and freedoms is limited «for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order, and general welfare in a democratic society.»

Yet in the late sixties and throughout the seventies, while continuing to contribute to discussions of hope and freedom, process theologians lagged far behind in the discussion of Christian responsibility for public affairs, especially as these are politically conceived.

He thinks energies are best spent recalling America to its founding principles, in hopes of preserving the dwindling space of freedom for Christians in the public square.

Join me and publish for years... and when others don't like what we write or how we behave, we can stop the Freedom of Speech, retract that we are Limited Purpose Public Figures, and scrub the Internet clean!

Think freedom, think environment, think any public good that we take for granted and that humanity has learned to cherish, honor and protect by our example.

[T] he exposure of persistent human rights violations by the contras has led the Administration not to pressure contra leaders to enforce international codes of conduct,» the Americas Watch Report cited earlier states, «but to drown U.S. public opinion with praise for the «freedom fighters,» and to attempt to discredit all reports of their violations as inspired by communist or Sandinista propaganda.

The character of this suffering moves theological attention to the social systems that shape our lives — economic, political, cultural — as well as to public events themselves (the Holocaust, programs and policies of economic austerity, military intervention, terrorism, ethnic nationalist expression, struggles for survival and freedom).

atheist have total freedom in the public square, bit Christians are second class citizens, because the all supreme atheist say their speech is not fit for public airing.

As for the «narrow public witness» against which John Murdock rightly cautions, I really don't think «prioritizing» equals «ignoring,» such that to prioritize the defense of religious freedom and the right to life excludes other issues from the Church's social witness and public policy advocacy.

George Weigel calls for the Church to «discipline itself» into a narrow public witness addressing religious freedom and life issues only, what he sees as «the points of maximum confrontation with the dictatorship of relativism.»

As for «Freedom of Religion,» that is slowly becoming, «Shut up, never mention your faith in public.

The most explicit statement of these limitations is in the Constitution's first ten amendments — the Bill of Rights — which guarantee freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition, the right to bear arms, protection against the obligatory quartering of soldiers, security from unwarranted search and seizure, the right to a grand jury, protection against double jeopardy and self - incrimination, the right of due process, just compensation for private property taken for public use, and speedy public trial by jury without excessive fines or bail.

Look at some of the laws in this country, and the ignorant christians who are trying to prevent atheists from voting or holding public office, or to simply use their first amendment rights for freedom of speech.

If religion is understood in its elemental sense, and not merely in its sectarian expressions, it is entirely practicable for the public schools to educate religiously without violating any ideals of religious freedom, without partisanship for any historical tradition, and without transgressing the principle of persuasion, not compulsion, in all matters of faith.

For Baptists, the great doctrines of the Reformation were refracted through the prism of persecution and dissent which informed their intense advocacy of religious freedom and, especially in the American setting, the separation of church and state (which does not equal the divorce of religion from public life).

The wall of separation actually exists to PROTECT religious freedom by keeping politics and political influences OUT of religion and religious expressions, but the caveat is that religion has to then stay out of politics as well and not ask for political influence (such as public funds).

For almost 80 years, Mercer County Public Schools have offered a Bible class to elementary school students and now, the Freedom From Religion Foundation is fighting to remove them.

Spelled out in a lengthy lead editorial entitled «Evangelicals in the Social Struggle,» as well as in books such as Aspects of Christian Social Ethics, Henry's understanding of Christian social responsibility stressed (a) society's need for the spiritual regeneration of all men and women, (b) an interim social program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political system.

He showed us how to work for freedom in circumstances rather tougher than we are currently experiencing in Britain, and he showed us that the public celebration of the Faith - processions, open - air Masses, youth events - plays a central role in achieving or affirming the rights of Christians.

In this politics of freedom, religion figures as a cultural power, a recognized public force; and the freedom that one claims for it is the more legitimate as religion is not its exclusive beneficiary.

But precisely for this reason all Christians do not only receive a complete and supposedly concrete natural law which is communicated to them by the official representatives of the Church, they also find out for them - selves the actual requirements of public life, so that all may have as much freedom as possible, a freedom that can act with God in view and thus create that personal finality which receives God himself as its eternal meaning.

We have the freedom and the capacity for action, but we don't know what will result from our public words and deeds and we can't stop them once they're out.

Franky Schaeffer decries neutrality as a «myth» which results in a freedom from religion and the exclusion of all those who operate on the basis of religious convictions from involvement in public life (Time for Anger, pp. 19 - 20).

The ruling was a victory for groups such as the Freedom From Religion Foundation, whose co-president, Annie Laurie Gaylor, told the Los Angeles Times: «Religion is innately divisive and just doesn't belong in public parks.

To suggest, then, that religious believers (much less majorities who, qua majorities, also have a second claim on shaping public policy) are «wards» depending on the Constitution for their religious freedom and its scope is, to use Posner and Segall's words against them, «to turn the Constitution upside down when it comes to government and religion.»

12) It is therefore right that public policy should encourage the well - being of the natural family unit and discourage activities that fundamentally undermine it, including sexual activities; fornication, for example, whether inter-sex or same - sex, ought to be discouraged in a manner respectful of individual freedom and responsibility.

The program called for mixed public - private ownership of key industries to prevent monopolies and economic concentration, «planning and direction» of the economy, self - management of economic relations through occupational councils, promotion of small - to medium - sized firms, and protection of individual freedom and private property.

From that shocking conviction of faith, Luther was able to go forth teaching, preaching, raising a family, running from authorities, sulking in protective custody in two castles, translating the Bible, writing hymns, eating and drinking with students and colleagues, maladministering the new congregations of evangelicals, struggling for freedom, devising pragmatic polities for the churches, becoming a public and political figure, defying pope and emperor and developing a Christ - centered theology.

February 2011 — Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years, Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress.