Sentences with phrase «same arguments with»

Are you tired of having the same arguments with your loved ones?

«Sometimes we try so hard to make changes only to find ourselves right back where we started... stuck in the same old routine or having the same arguments with our loved ones.

I have had the exact same arguments with my in - laws and friends about my parenting techniques!

This is the same argument with Creationism vs. Evolution.

I'm not having this same argument with you over and over again mate... 19 goals was his season total for Arsenal, all comps.

It was the same argument with the iPhone and makes an even better argument for tablets trying to replace laptops.

I have gone through the same argument with Max (manacker).

Funny, I could make the exact same argument with respect to limitations on free inquiry — and the use of universities and state power to expel and suppress unpopular groups and dissenting opinion (and, aside, are you really holding up Nazi Germany as a bastion of free inquiry?

Are you tired of having the same argument with your mate?

I was trawling through last year's HouseGoesHome June blogs for Hump Day inspiration when I discovered I had the same argument with him last year.

Not exact matches

As the argument goes, we put guards with guns in banks to stop thieves, so why not use that same strategy to protect our children?

The basic premise of the argument Keynes had with his peers is the same as the one today.

A parade of reports and experts explained away high house prices and debt levels with many of the same arguments we hear today in Canada — yes, prices are way up compared to rents, but the analysis is built on flawed data; debt levels are high, but so are house prices, which minimizes the risk; America's demographics support the boom; and then the classic: There'll be a soft landing.

The eight - justice court is hearing arguments Monday in two cases that deal with the same basic issue of whether race played too large a role in the drawing of electoral districts, to the detriment of African - Americans.

The same issue has come up recently with demands from mega-givers not to have to disclose their giving on the argument that they're likely to be criticized or «vilified» or «intimidated.»

Neal and Taylor's argument was rooted in math: there were more consumers than there were IT users, which meant that over the long run the rate of improvement in consumer technologies would exceed that of enterprise - focused ones; IT departments needed to grapple with increased demand from their users to use the same technology they used at home.

Although I agree with you RiadaKram, that the posters arguments were rather crude, at the same time, I'm afraid the tired old «how many people did your side murder» argument is equally as crude.

If you're going to make the stupid argument that the term «belief» means the same thing whether it's applied to a god or the sun coming up, then argue with someone else.

I find it funny that the Christian position, when met with any logical argument to discount the greatness of the Bible, can only cite more passages from the same book, as opposed to countering with a equally logical counter position.

But if you are looking for consilience, in which multiple lines of independent evidence converge on the same target, then Schwartz's argument is a good one to have in your arsenal, for it fits nicely with biological arguments for intelligent design (cf. Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box), recent philosophical work on mental causation (cf. Robert Koons» Realism Regained), cosmological fine - tuning (cf. John Barrow and Frank Tipler's The Anthropic Cosmological Principle), and consciousness studies (cf. Dean Radin's The Conscious Universe).

... well the same logic applys to god... i enjoy dropping these logic bombs on people and see how they react and hope that maybe that logic bomb will eventually set up a chain reaction in their consciousness... or maybe I am an egotistical f c k who just likes to have an unassaiable argument which with to beat others over the head with... maybe I am wrong to do so because the Human Condition is so cold and bleak in its finality that people need the cushion of god to go on with their everyday lives.

Of course they may end up disagreeing with Bernard of Clairvaux, Augustine, and Barth about the moral significance of our being created male and female, but shouldn't they be a little less sanguine about it and a little more deferential, to the point of saying, «We believe the tradition made a grave mistake in its disallowance of gay partnerships, but at the same time we acknowledge our deep indebtedness to that tradition for giving us the theological and ethical vision to even make our argument for inclusion»?

I use many of the same arguments as you, but went with «week» for sabbatwn.

As for the claim that if one simply waits long enough with an open heart, God will reveal Himself — that same argument is made by just about every religion.

If you want to have a serious debate, you'll have to start engaging with the facts and arguments that have been presented rather than merely ignoring them and restating the same old arguments that you seem so desperate to believe.

Even with WWI, or even more so with Iraq I, where stronger cases can be for the importance of U.S. economic motivation, it becomes very hard to distinguish the «we must not let Germany control Europe» or «Iraq control the Gulf» - type argument made on geostrategic grounds, from the same argument made on economic grounds.

The same argument applies to the life and medical insurance premiums people pay because there is no cheaper, more efficient public program for dealing with the costs of medical care and old - age security.

In the Netherlands a law to that effect was adopted in 2001, with the same arguments of our Christian politicians and the same consequences.

Not to mention, this entire post is one long and contra - biblical argument that you / we shouldn't argue about theology, without ever setting forth clear and logical propositions that NOT arguing (again, fill in whatever verb you're more comfortable with, the result is the same) theology honors God more than standing in the gap and defending the truth he has set forth once and for all.

He killed millions with the same argument you're using.

Funny but it seems that no matter how many facts are given to Christians about gays they still come back with the same bigoted arguments so they are incapable of learning?

What is with the Christian backers of their god as soon as they are backed into a corner and they do not have a logical answer they come back well after the fact and start the same BS arguments all over again.

Since they use the same round size (5.56 mm /.223 caliber), I think we can stop there with your argument.

Just because pro-choice advocates make these arguments does not mean that courts (the same courts that are ready to overrule Roe) are likely to discover abortion rights under a statute that does not even mention abortion and that was enacted with the support of pro-life groups like the National Association of Evangelicals and the Mormon Church.

The problem with your argument is the assumption that God's time frame reference is the same as ours.

Hint: It's the same argument, you will keep falling into an endless paradox of the human mind, better yet the Lord told us clearly in the Bible that it's not with the brain that we will know He exists: «Ye shall seek me and find me when ye shall search for me with all your heart.»

To critics of biblical inerrancy, it sounds like we Christians are making the same argument as this man uses: Is this what we do with Scripture?

What is confusing about gerald's arguments and those of catholic engineer is that they're advocating precisely the same thing as what China has done with its one - child policy.

A compelling argument against gay marriage must begin with the premise that same - gender se.xu.al preference is a natural, healthy and moral orientation.

Wilson's first argument was against the cavalierness of same - sex marriage advocates, who propose a massive social change with little idea how it will shake out:

Jen: «This is the same tired argument about slippery slope... that next polygamy, incest, and marriage with animals will be legalized.

This is the same tired argument about slippery slope... that next polygamy, incest, and marriage with animals will be legalized.

Any student of history or literature knows that all the arguments used to defend the genocidal slaughter of one's enemies are the exact same arguments we find in the Bible about why the Israelites went to war with the Canaanites.

But what he does argue for is that Paul's arguments in Romans 1, Romans 11 and Galatians 3 are broadly isomorphic with the arguments offered to exclude same - sex unions from the church.

no no no, i first engage them in a conversation... normally ending badly due to them not liking my choice of argument or tools i use in a conversation over belief... so in short i am norally the one insulted and left to think... which i believe is the same way children act when they hear the word «NO»... but i have had some great conversations with people over religion, its just a rare thing.

That is, if one's interlocutor is being threatened with violence, torture, or death at the same time as he is being confronted with a polemical argument, and if the outcome of the latter determines whether he is killed, tortured, forcibly converted, or whatever (this was, of course, the case for many Jews in medieval Europe), then it is exceedingly doubtful that the polemic is morally proper.

i don't find those arguments to be on the same planet with what i'm stating.

Here is the curious thing: As I interact with people of other religions, and through the course of conversation find out why they hold their beliefs, I find that nearly all people of all religions have these same four basic arguments for why their beliefs are true.

The form of the argument is roughly: If the modes of the therapy's theory of self can correlate with Whitehead's modes of perception, and these same modes can correlate with the stages of gestalt formation, which in turn correlate with the phases of concrescence, then it is quite possible that Whitehead's mode of perception can correlate with the phases of concrescence.

Indeed, an argument could be made that at no time since the First Great Awakening have so many churches of disparate denominational, theological and stylistic approaches been so united in terms of their music: one can now walk into old - line Pentecostal churches, small - town evangelical congregations, mall - like suburban megachurches, and many a mainline Protestant sanctuary across the country on any given Sunday morning and hear the same hymns and choruses done in approximately the same musical styles, with similar settings and instrumentation.