Sentences with phrase «religious claims of»

In our view, it is important to account for historic religious inequities in evaluating the contemporary religious claims of Aboriginal peoples.

It is impossible to believe in the Trinity instead of the distinctive religious claims of all other religions.

i have not «faith» that there is not god, but i have reasoned that there is no evidence to support the religious claims of men.

You are projecting the religious claims of other Christian denominations in regards to heaven and hell onto the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter - day Saints but you are markedly incorrect.

Considering that women have tolerated 7,000 years of scientific and religious claims of male superiority, you'd think that men could take a little of their own medicine.

A teaching that delivers the first ever religious claim of insight into the human condition that meets the Enlightenment criteria of verifiable, direct cause and effect, evidence based truth embodied in experience.

Not exact matches

Critics of the religion also dispute Miscavige's claims of the complex's ability to reach «billions» of people, especially considering that, according to the American Religious Identification Survey, only 25,000 Americans consider themselves Scientologists.

Brooks also reminds Schultz that Trump once proposed a boycott of the coffee chain when many claimed that its seasonal red cups weren't merry enough for Christmas — even though the holiday cups have never included the words «Merry Christmas» or invoked any religious imagery.

The TRO also prohibits the government from «proceeding with any action that prioritizes the refugee claims of certain religious minorities.»

Indiana's law, for example, allows people and businesses to claim exemption based only on the likelihood that their religious freedom could be infringed, said Katherine Franke, a professor of law and director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality at Columbia University, in New York.

According to a recent article in The Star, both Richmond and Todai have come under fire from religious groups who are claiming that the name of their store is «blasphemous.»

Likewise, last October, the Department of Justice released a memo telling its federal agencies to allow maximum discretion to those claiming religious exceptions on the grounds that it was not the government's place to challenge «the reasonableness of a religious belief.»

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair reached further back in history today to claim for his own party a link to the defence of religious freedoms in Quebec.

Religious freedom rights are contingent on the level of personal devotion demonstrated by those claiming them.

Of these, a little more than half (11) involved explicitly religious claims.

While ridiculing the claims of both «liberal «secular» and «conservative «religious» theorists, it is only religious theorists whom Posner appears to concede may be able to produce a credible theory of moral realism, based on «faith in a Supreme Lawgiver.»

There is really no difference between you and all those religious nuts, running around, claiming to be in a posession of the truth.

I appreciate it may be difficult to reconcile your religious faith with the available evidence, but despite the claims of fundamentalists, one doesn't need to abandon their religious faith in accepting what the physical evidence indicates.

First, the writers — quoting atheist proselytizer Richard Dawkins — claim that children of religious parents should not be considered religious, more than implying that their «beliefs» should be considered those of the secular state.

Perhaps instead they should have used common sense and consideration before praying within an environment of heightened sense of security in which religious fanaticism has claimed human lives.

Religions incorporated and codified these basic social values and skills, and quickly learned to take credit for them — as if, without the religion, we would be doomed to not have them — although we see them in every human society, including hunter - gather tribes with no sense of gods as we understand them After many centuries of religious domination, enforced through pain of death, ostracization or other social sanctions, allowing religion to take credit, as well as failing to question other religious claims — has become a cultural habit.

I will no longer take the time to refute the unlearned and undocumentable claims of certain world religious leaders who call homosexuality «deviant.»

Let's stop letting the extremists control all religious discussions by claiming the whole of the religion as their own.

outside of the bible, or any other religious texts (which, again, are only relevant to those accept the claimed authority) do you see any evidence of heaven, hell, sin, or redemption?

As Owen argues, the ascendant form of philosophical liberalism, with its tenuous claims to be a space without any religious commitments, is «not well equipped to confront a world of resurgent religion, particularly religion that is uneasy with or rejects liberal democratic principles.»

A better strategy would be to point out how one doesn't need religion to be a moral person, and then demonstrate how some of the people that claim to be a beacon for religious zealots (the GOP) practice an existence devoid of morality.

In an earlier interview with the Press & Journal, Mr Movan claimed his constitutional right to practise freedom of religion had been «infringed upon» and that the police department had made «no accommodation» for his religious beliefs.

Fifteen percent of rescuers claimed religious commitments as central in their motivation.

Anyway this isn't a relgious issue at all, to make it into a relgious issue is a bit silly unless what they are claiming is that this rule ONLY applies to religious groups in which case that is clear discrimination on the part of the University.

Coronations of monarchs were important religious ceremonies because their religious legitimation of particular political rulers expressed Christendom's fundamental claim that the empire's (or nation's) authority and unity was ordained by God.

While blasphemy laws claim to seek religious harmony through uniformity, in practice they provide cover for the pursuit of personal vendettas and crush fundamental freedoms for Pakistan's religious minorities.

Where debate on the subject of religion versus secularism is concerned, it's always easy to find voices shrieking over the banishment of religion and Christianity from American life, and claims the nation is morally bankrupt because of the success progressives have had with marginalizing or outlawing religious practices.

Yes, depending on your religious beliefs, you may or may not believe the events and accomplishments of that are ascribed to each and that is fine, but no rational historian claims neither simply did not exist.

The Pew report finds that among the 27 percent of Americans who identify as «spiritual but not religious,» 35 percent also claim that they are Protestant.

you sir are practicing a religion one that means so much to you that you use it as your online name also please show me where I call you a fool or is telling someone not to make a fool of themself the same as calling them a fool which would mean you are very religious as far as Colin he said nothing that related to the debate I was in with you... we are talking about Atheism as a religious view not debating the existence of God now look over the definitions I have shown you and please explain how Atheism does not fit into the said definitions And you claim that evolution is true so the burden of proof falls in your lap as it is the base of your religion.

Well it is true that some people seek sorcerers to implement Jinn that are satanic demons into mankind or his house or his business to finish him or make his life miserable or to stop flow of his business income... In such case it is either you are religious enough and say your prayers often then it becomes hard for this to harm you or otherwise you need to find some one who practice exorcism to remove this evil... But many are just pretending to be good at it and help you not but squeeze money out of you with tales and stories... There is another type of possessions and that is not through a sorcerer but directly by coincidence what man is at his weakest moments and those weakest moments for a possessions are when you come through a great fear or when cry or laugh loudly in hysteria, or during a certain moment of mating... or even when sneezing loudly... That's why there are prayers to be said on daily basis to guard you from such things and specially if passing haunted places such as deserted houses but most evil ones are residents of public toilets and market places... Some of them even would claim that you have made a wrong action by which you have killed a dear one to them and for that they have possessed you and that is mostly night time such as throwing a cigaret butt to a dark place or stepping killing an insect or even an animal at night which could have been one of them or possessed by one of them... So this is true thing happening to many who suffer unexplainable illnesses or sufferings which could look like mental illness that comes and goes as pleased...

If there is a God as the religious claim, then there should be some empirical evidence of that God unless that God is intentionally hiding from its own creations which should make one wonder, «Why?»

The Supreme Court just upheld the righs of religious groups to determine their own leadership (completely rejecting claims that discrimination laws applied to them.)

I only trust God, not anyone who claims they know what God has in store for you as long as you follow THEIR plan or way of believing, the true path to God is spiritual and not Religious.

She said that exclusive claims to religious truth should become «obsolete» because 9/11 demonstrated the destructive power of that type of thinking (the 9/11 hijackers were motivated in part by an extremist form of Islam).

The majority claiming Jesus actually existed are religious scholars who have a wee bit of bias.

Kaine started out with a version of the «personally opposed but publically supporting» argument based on the specious claim that the First Amendment of the Constitution prevents us from imposing our religious «values» on public life.

Reading the account of how this professor expressed himself about the author's experience with the dying begs the question in my mind, - How many religious scholars and clergymen are as truly enlightened about life, death and the nature of things as they self - satisfyingly claim to be doctored in religion?

At several junctures I have pointed to the absence of any framework by which the Oliners can distinguish qualitative differences in the ways persons are religious, the ways they make sense of the claims of care, and the ways they interpret what is their duty or obligation.

It does come as a result of actually reading the religious books, and the manufactured history it claims.

Religion makes it okay to lie, the proof is throughout it's history and even at its core, All those who claim to be religious have a huge amount of doubt and they fight that all their lives until they have an instance where they have no control.

The difference is that the supernatural claims of religious dogma are things which can not ever be proven true outside of the context which I have already mentioned, which is the context of belief.

Welcome to the new Civil War, only this time instead of slave - owners hiding their avarice behind claims of state's rights, it's religious extremists who are doing that.

According to a 2006 Baylor University study, for example, almost two - thirds - 63 percent - of Americans who claim no religious affiliation believe in God.

For a nation that claims that there is no religious test for president, we sure do spend a lot of time worrying about it.