Sentences with phrase «rather argues against it»

With regards to Steyn's countersuit, if he makes a lot of money off this book, that would rather argue against large damages from his countersuit.

Not exact matches

Renting, rather than owning a home, has positive implications for labor mobility, argues Harvard professor Jeffrey Frankel in a May 29th article posted on the Project Syndicate website, headlined «The Case Against Subsidizing Housing Debt.»

He could also come out against guest worker programs and argue that those we invite to come to our country should be welcomed as future citizens rather than helots to be exploited and discarded if they should face a spell of unemployment.

Most significantly, Duddington argues against the charge that permitting an increasing role for religion in the legal and political (i.e., public) spheres would necessitate the imposition of one system of belief upon another, by re-emphasising the argument that Christianity does not serve to generate a moral code, but rather provides a vehicle through which it may be discovered.

I'm not saying the unnecessary suffering of animals is good, or moral, but rather pointing out that your perspective on the subject is no more rational, no more based on fact, than that of the people you are arguing against.

So, in conclusion, us born again followers of Jesus Christ should not argue against each other but rather try and listen to our fellow siblings in Christ.

Rather, it is a simple illustration is precisely the kind of scientific illiteracy Nye and others are arguing against in the first place.

George N. Boyd argues against the traditional position of the opponents of capital punishment that no crime ever «deserves» the death penalty, and suggests that the debate is not over what murderers deserve, but rather about how society should express and defend its fundamental values.

Someone else «defended premillennialism over against postmillennialism rather than arguing for the posttribulation Rapture as opposed to the pretribulation position.»

They might argue even (against Paul) that doing such things sends people to hell, rather than seeing references to the «Kingdom of God» or «Kingdom of Heaven» as Jesus used them, as being about out lives here and now and what we might accomplish as we follow Christ (to which a «beneficial» conversation is much more fitting).

It is interesting that Karl Barth, who argued rather unconvincingly against Christian art, expressed great admiration for this painting.

It is so sad that so many atheists will spend most of their lives fighting and arguing against the very thing that can save them, only to die and go to hell and then to spend eternity regretting the fact that they wasted all of their time arguing about it rather than just accepting it, rather than just believing, and a belief that could have saved them.

In fact, the variety of subjects treated and the fact that Mark and Luke use some of these sayings in other contexts argue rather persuasively against a single audience and a single occasion.

I'm not aiming to spend much time arguing against complementarianism, but rather showing that egalitarianism is a tenable position for Christians, based on scripture, reason, tradition, etc..

Those who argue against same - sex marriage on the basis of its potential to diminish the effectiveness of the institution as a solid foundation for social stability have not thought about the price we have already paid for this personal freedom, or the historical reality that most citizens of Western Nations have already chosen to pay it rather than choose the relative social stability / security of tribalistic collectivism.

Of course, people on the left can be morally arrogant, but it would have helped if he had offered some specific evidence rather than simply the fact that those writers had argued on moral terms for a stronger presumption against war or a greater redistributive role for the state.

This is on what these two are truly arguing; Wenger uses the cup as an example against Neville but Neville isn't really belittling our ability to win games, but rather, that in the long run of a whole season it is more likely for us to drop points due to relying purely on skill which is far more linked to form then something like physicality.

stats are great to show number of assitsts etc and one can argue he needs someone to put those away... however he needs to turn a big game in Arsenals favour rather than just shining against the minnows... Chelsea on Saturday would be a great game to do that!

There could be a case to argue if incorrect refereeing decisions kept going against you (as they did with West Ham last season) that you have been the victim of misfortune; but if it is simply your players not being able to do there job effectively (e.g. by converting goal - scoring opportunities) then this is a reflection of ability or coaching rather than luck.

We do not advocate that all homebirth practices follow our lead, but we argue against the statement that NICUs are sustained by the admissions of home born babies and rather, hospital births and their subsequent NICU admissions need further investigation.

From this post, it wasn't obvious (to me at least) that you were arguing against all «harsh, punitive disciplinary measures» as ineffective in the long - term rather than just spanking.

As Radice argues, if they had found a way of working with each other rather than against each other, much more could have been achieved.

Ari Paul argues that police unions deserve not solidarity from other city unions, but rather, healthy antagonism — public sector workers like teachers should take a forceful stance against police brutality.

The only contentious moment of the evening was when one of the panelists, a successful bar and restaurant owner named Michael Sinensky, argued against the legislation by painting himself, rather than his employees — some of whom make minimum wage — as a victim of the tough economy.

Arguing against mitigation by appealing to uncertainty is therefore misplaced: any appeal to uncertainty should provoke a greater, rather than weaker, concern about climate change than in the absence of uncertainty.

He argued that the fundamental unit upon which natural selection acted was not the individual but rather the gene itself, which was intrinsically selfish because it engaged in a battle against other genes for survival.

Rather than detaching from or merely arguing against state accountability policies, Superintendent Wauters met with state leaders to talk about the importance of having state assessments and accountability measures aligned with the new state focus.

In a paper published in Evolutionary Psychological Science, NRCCTE at SREB - affiliated researchers bring an evolutionary perspective to bear on adolescent learning and argue that applied approaches to learning like CTE can help schools work with student biases in attention and motivation, rather than against them.

In this paper, authors George B. Richardson, Marisa E. Castellano, James R. Stone III, and Blair K. Sanning bring an evolutionary perspective to bear on adolescent learning and argue that approaches to education that stress learning in context - for example, career and technical education (CTE)- can help schools work with student biases in attention and motivation, rather than against them.

Some prominent U.S. investors have argued rather vociferously against international investing.

TFG seems to be hoarding cash and has argued against paying dividends — that makes me worried — rather pay dividend and let investors decide what to do with it?

What the backgrounds do though is add a sense of scale and you see first hand the sheer vastness of Eggman's destruction and there's nothing to really argue against the visuals being really rather terrific.

Yeah, that's basically what Nintendo argued against when releasing the original Wii — the graphics processor wasn't that much more powerful than the Gamecube, certainly much less so than the Xbox 360 and PS3, but they wanted to focus on creating innovative, new experiences rather than just spending 50 million dollars on HD textures and making Ocarina of Time over and over.

I have seen discussion time and again about how the subscription model has to focus on keeping you subscribed, so I would say that your assertion is a fallacy itself, a straw man to argue against, rather than something that one might take seriously.

In Structure, he was arguing (against Popper) that theory - formation is non-linear and «driven» by paradigm shifts rather than «led» by theory.

And in your opinion, I am playing the catastrophic role, why don't you argue against the points I make rather than straw men of your own construction?

Mostly, the democratic senators were effective in giving the impression that the scientists were arguing against the fact that temperatures have been rising rather than what the implications are.

Rather than argue against their opponents - which surely puts them on a firm footing if the evidence is as irrefutable as they suggest - they try to discredit them.

PPS You apparently argue against «national ownership» of the atmosphere, but rather «global ownership» (by the UN or a «World State»?)

This uncertainty argues even more strongly against premising policy largely on «most likely» outcomes because our ability to identify the most likely outcome is rather suspect.

My view is that in the face of very ignorant journalistic nonsense, too many scientists are failing to maintain their research objectivity and argue against alarmist or foolish interpretations (such as the obvious alarmist tone of AIT) I see good scientists lining up ideologically rather than methodologically, and find this painful to watch.

In their defense against the cities suing over sea level rise damages, the oil industry lawyers essentially argued that the blame lies not on the producers, but rather the consumers of fossil fuels, and that any economic issues should be addressed through policy rather than in the court system.

Thorne - Begland's opponents argued that they voted against him not because he was gay, but rather because his advocacy «amounted to military insubordination and a challenge to the state constitution, which bans gay marriage and civil unions,» the Post reports.

As I read him, he is not arguing against introducing ABS - type changes but, rather, is arguing that the ABS - type changes should be more fully oriented to improving A2J (for more people).

LAWPRO's counsel successfully argued that this was not a case where the plaintiff should be forced to seek compensation against her lawyers, rather than the accidents benefits insurer.

The BCSC argued that the event giving rise to the proceeding against McLean was not her original misconduct, but rather the fact of having agreed with a securities regulator to be subject to regulatory action.

Many of the commenters critical of loser pays are arguing against a specific form of loser pays rather than considering various approaches that might be adopted within the American system.