Sentences with phrase «when claiming her supporting»

But the #MeToo and #TimesUp movement made its presence known throughout the ceremony, including several past Oscar - winning actresses including 93 - year - old Eva Marie Saint, who won a supporting award for 1955's «On the Waterfront» and 86 - year - old Puerto Rican native Rita Moreno, who donned the same gown she wore when claiming her supporting prize for 1961's «West Side Story.»

Not exact matches

But claiming that children are disadvantaged when their mothers don't take a full maternity leave, however, is a little bit like claiming that being sexually active is bad for teenagers — we all want to believe that supposition is true, but the credible research so far doesn't actually support it.

The tech giant claims that roughly 45 % of its new hires in 2016 were of diverse backgrounds, and that it has established an advising and support service called the WarmLine for employees to consult with when considering leaving the company.

Even Dr. House and his team of ace diagnosticians may claim at times that something is likely wrong with the MRI machine when the image it has generated does not support their current diagnosis.

Populist William Jennings Bryan cried fake news when misleading stories went out over the AP wire claiming that Bryan was supporting Teddy Roosevelt for a third term.

CATA believes that the CRA's de facto re-orientation of Canada's largest program of support for innovation needs to be corrected immediately so that the full spectrum of technological based advancements is supported and that SR&ED can be effectively claimed when it is conducted in conjunction with the highly integrated commercially - oriented development efforts that Canadian companies need to apply in order to be competitive and efficient, and respond to world markets.3

When you subscribe to Social Security Timing ® software, you get industry - leading software that identifies the best claiming strategies and an entire support team to help you answer Social Security and software questions.

You said, «You got your morals from The Bible, regardless of when or where YOU claim it came from (with no supporting evidence from you, I might add).»

You got your morals from The Bible, regardless of when or where YOU claim it came from (with no supporting evidence from you, I might add).

Among them are the rights to: bullet joint parenting; bullet joint adoption; bullet joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents); bullet status as next - of - kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent; bullet joint insurance policies for home, auto and health; bullet dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support; bullet immigration and residency for partners from other countries; bullet inheritance automatically in the absence of a will; bullet joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment; bullet inheritance of jointly - owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate); bullet benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare; bullet spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home; bullet veterans» discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns; bullet joint filing of customs claims when traveling; bullet wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children; bullet bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child; bullet decision - making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her; bullet crime victims» recovery benefits; bullet loss of consortium tort benefits; bullet domestic violence protection orders; bullet judicial protections and evidentiary immunity; bullet and more...

When we see that the bible and science differ then we have to defer to science since it actually has evidence to support its claims.

-LSB-...] the proponents of Populorum Progressio -LSB-...] would seem to be promoting a «hermeneutics of rupture» when they claim that the tradition of Catholic social doctrine began anew with Populorum Progressio — a claim that at least some passages in Caritas in Veritate can be interpreted to support.

Hmmm, seems like an empty claim when the existence of FSM is not well supported.

The thing about making assertions is that they are often more effective when there is some tangible proof to support your claims.

Islam mentioned this for the longest time and as you can imagine, at a time when people had no access or means to verify those claims (people like yourself, opted to disbelief and argue about the existence of God) but now that those scientific «discoveries» became realities and the same as supported by the Quran (that was sent to Prophet Mohammed, Peace and Blessings be upon him), from God), it only solidifies Islam as the true religion of God.

When people make outlandish claims and then butcher language or distort words meanings in order to support those claims, it shouldn't be «kept in mind.»

@godfreenow In logic, an argument is made when a claim is supported by a set of premises, which both support the other one.

Offering specious arguments such as in the article to support that... claiming there's evidence of that when there isn't... that offends.

We identified the warrior God as our God, and when we came into political power we frequently claimed God's support for military conquests.

Individuals are free to believe what ever they want, it is when they try to validate actions or policies which limit rights of others they should be required to support their claims and / or face the backlash.

Yet in the long run, the power of the claim is weakened when no conceptuality is available to support it, and it is to offer such a conceptuality that this paper has been prepared.

I've seen enough archeological evidence to support the claims of the Book of Mormon that the people that lived in the ancient America's really did exist when and how the book describes.

It is not right to support her claim that she was excommunicated for asking questions when she has all the above going on.

To support this claim, he offered an account of what it means to be an editor: «When I edit, I attempt, to the extent possible, to conform my work to the author's original intent.

They would have been produced during the period when Christians were supporting the claim of Davidic descent for Jesus against Jewish denials, and the discrepancies between them indicate the lack of any authentic or authoritative source of information.

In Jordan, support for bin Laden remained strong until 2005, when a trio of suicide bombings for which al Qaeda claimed responsibility killed dozens in the nation's capital.

At other times, however, especially when he is speaking systematically and not illustrating or supporting his argument with concrete examples, Whitehead seems to make a stronger claim for causal efficacy.

One side effect of the research I've done in writing the book, is that when somebody presents 10K verses to support their claim, I can write a short reply: «Thank you for providing so much scriptural support that conclusively proves my position, and demonstrates that your position has no basis in scripture», and, if challenged, go through each cited verse, and, using one or more specific techniques / methods of Bible study, show how the cited verse either refutes the position they present, or supports the position I present.

Best to be able to support your claims when you are going to state that others are wrong.

@Jibbs: Sorry, you will need to provide references when making random claims of knowledge to support your hypothesis.

When you asked me which parts had been debunked, and I wasn't allowed to cherry pick lines out of context that were meant to be allegory to support my claim, I in return asked what parts in the bible then are suppsoed to be metaphorical and what are literal, obviously we won't agree because you already know my stance and I know yours, neither stance is going to change, but I'm interested to know from you specifically, what in the bible is proven to be correct?

If we discount appeals that had relevance only when considering the claim that Premise X is meaningless or the claim that Premise X is logically false (i.e., Griffin's appeal to the meaninglessness of «X is a powerless actuality» in the first case and to «the definition of «actual being» in the second case), Griffin's text provides nothing in the way of support for the assertion that the metaphysical principle upon which he is relying is correct.

The careful reader will notice that Matthew casts the religious experts of the day (those robed in canonical or clerical dress) in the role of «them,» a move that supports a tongue - in - cheek, foot - in - mouth reading of the disciples when they claim to understand it all.

I will never consider it rude to state what the logical conclusion should be according to your attempted deduction, to demand a similarly logical deduction in support of any and all seriously made claims by others, to call out the bullshit when someone fails to do so, or to respond to people behaving like idiots, making idiotic statements or trying to argue without sufficient intellectual abilities, by calling them what they are: idiots.

6 In support of his claim that Bergsonian and Whiteheadian proto - mentalisms are fundamentally of the same cloth, Capek cites the following passage from Whitehead's «Immortality» (1941): «When memory and anticipation are completely absent, there is complete conformity to the average influence of the past.

I suspect most scholars realize that when they make a bold claim it should be supported by evidence.

When Tetra Pak supported a customer with a full Total Productive Maintenance implementation, claims from the market were reduced by 73.8 %.

When you consider Man Utd and Chelsea would put in a bid and be able to offer higher wages AND have more of a claim to challenging for the PL title, the only factor we have going for us is the Arsenal factor (in that he maybe supported us as a kid).

The team has generally supported him, like back in 2013 when Bryant claimed a tantrum on the sideline was «all positive.»

whether for the right or wrong reasons, our leader chose to stay on when things took a turn of sorts... a new owner arrived on the scene, plans for a new stadium emerged and Wenger became the bearer of bad news... he sold us on a new story, one that required patience on our parts... financial constraints were the order of the day, so that the enormous sums spent on the new venue could be recouped... although some would question the validity of such claims, why wouldn't they believe their faithful leader... according to those within the hierarchy, the future never looked so bright, as this new home would ensure our place among the elites for years to come... as we all know now these claims were a well constructed fabrication and so those who feel they were duped in the process are infuriated and rightly so... the fact that this club and it's manager have continually misled the fans, especially following Gazidis's claims about our financial liquidity, simply rubbed more salt in an already gaping wound... this surely isn't how you treat your «family», especially when they supported you through the supposed «lean» years... it was a dirty trick played by Kroenke but the fact is was orchestrated by Wenger himself hurt the most... as for those in the media, many of whom are former players or longtime pundits, who observed the early years firsthand, saw this as the perfect opportunity to vent the anger they felt towards this pretentious man once and for all... all in all, karma's a bitch

Happy to see the club you claim support go down the toilet because the one responsible for managing it can not see when it is time to move on.

the analysis from barton is unreasonable and immature.messi scored from open play bcos he has suarez and neymar to support them who are as talented and EXPERIENCED.while chamberlain and some players do nt hav that experience or lacks form right now.the player chamberlain wa when he was signed, scoring spectacular goals and giving nice crosses, but now his form has been - do nt know wheter its bcos of low motivation levels or lack of confidence.so if sanchez had players as good as himself to support him in attack, then u will see that hes not far or i may even claim he is on same level asmsn..

strange how people like mediocrity, if you knew I have more reason than many to like and support Wenger but I put Arsenal love before everything and only a fool or a blind can think that Wenger is doing good with Arsenal, I would not be upset if the team was in this position if all the required signing had been done and the team was managed and rotated correctly as no one has sure right to success.It only hurts when the requirements are not dealt correctly and are dealt only with silly excuses.Fools for the fools, some claim to love Arsenal...

we were middle of the table when AW came, we have been no lower than since, not one other team in the prem can claim this, if the criteria by these fickle fans was to only be top one or two, without any regard for winning FA cup, then who would support Fulham?

Respect me as an arsenal season ticket holder.I know 99 % of the cry babies here have never seen the emarates live, fans who do nt buy Match tickets how do they claim to support the club may be through good will.@ADMIN you hide some of our comments when we criticise the club positively yet you have space to quote the metro and other unreliable sources to make a point.No titles no progress

I support that claim by saying, although he didn't have the longevity of certain legends he came in at a time when the club was so apathetic, players seemed rejected and despite winning the FA cup there was not a lot of optimism.

Carlos Tevez claims that he will always support Manchester City when it comes to choosing between the two Manchester clubs.

Sanchez had probably his poorest outing on a football pitch ever when Arsenal traveled to Manchester on the weekend but his manager still defended him during the post-match interview claiming that the 28 year old lacked support in attack.

November's double - header against Scotland and Spain could determine whether he gets to implement it but Henderson was clear when asked if the dressing room supported his claim.

My dear Arsenal supports world wide, let us bear in mind when Henry left, other clubs claimed Arsenal finished but but there supprised our performance, how ever Ade want leave Arsenal let Arsenal give him chance to go but at end he may be thinking of arsenl again, am certain who ever wenger wants bring in the team will be like those once who went I for one believe this year we have sliver wear.