Karen, the term vs
whole life argument is yesterday's news, tho one which Primerica trains you on to avoid Term vs Term battles.
Not exact matches
Darwin ripped the heart out of one of the God of the Gaps
arguments (i.e. we don't know how complex
life forms arose, therefore the Judeo - Christian god did it) but Hubble showed that the
whole idea of there being any cosmic importance to planet Earth is naked parochialism to the highest mathematical degree possible.
His own pet proof of «why there almost certainly is no God» (a proof in which he takes much evident pride) is one that a usually mild - spoken friend of mine (a friend who has devoted too much of his
life to teaching undergraduates the basic rules of logic and the elementary language of philosophy) has described as «possibly the single most incompetent logical
argument ever made for or against anything in the
whole history of the human race.»
The principal
argument for abortion for a disabled child is that the child's
life will not be worth
living, that it would be a burden to the child himself or herself, to those who have to care for him or her, and to society as a
whole.
These words and the concepts associated with them were very useful for intellectual purposes, but they made no contribution to
life, and Levin suddenly felt he was in the position of a man who had exchanged a warm fur coat for a muslin blouse, and who the first time he finds himself in the frost is persuaded beyond question, not by
arguments but by the
whole of his being, that he's no better than naked and is inevitably bound to perish miserably.16
It is with the idea and in the hope of advancing towards a solution of the problem that I here venture, basing my
argument on the widest possible zoological and biological grounds, to put forward a coherent view of the «thinking Earth» in which I believe we may find, undistorted but yet embodying the corrections required by a change of order, the
whole process of
Life and of vitalization.
but thats not what i'm talking about... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the
whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my
argument on the book itself, so if you have a counter
argument i believe you haven't a full understanding of the book — and that would be my overall point... belief without full understanding of or consideration to real
life or consequences for the hereafter is equal to a childs belief in santa which is why we atheists feel it is an equal comparision... and santa is clearly a bs story... based on real events from a real historical person but not a magical being by any means!
again your
whole argument is based on your ignorance of what jealousy is... jealousy as I said is a SEALOUS guarding of what belings to you... in a
living and caring way..
I don't think we need to know a person's
whole life story to get a grasp on anyone's
argument.
Or of the reality that with new
life comes swollen breasts, dry heaves, dirty diapers, snotty noses, late - night
arguments, and a
whole army of new dangers and fears she never even considered before because
life - giving isn't nearly as glamorous as it sounds, but it's a thousand times more beautiful.
That's the
whole transhumanist
argument — that we all make
life or death decisions all the time and most of us choose
life.
As for your
whole «Manhattan»
argument... I don't
live in NYC.
«Prohibition in this
whole area simply isn't working... Whilst people may find this distasteful, I think we need a proper full Royal Commission on this
whole area of drugs... Let's find out through a Royal Commission whether perhaps we should decriminalise drugs, whether we should license them, license the users and sell them at Boots... I think there is an
argument that says that if we decriminalised it, we'd make the
lives of millions of people far better than they are today.»
Beyond that great zinger, Zappa's
whole life was an aggro
argument — and a quest for brainy personal expression.
Half of the resources love
whole life insurance as a vehicle to save for college, and provide compelling
arguments.
The typical
argument on term vs
whole life regarding how long each lasts goes something like this:
(A good
argument can be made to choose
whole life insurance for children.)
Our goal in this article is to help dispel the lies and misinformation as we attempt to demystify the misguided
argument between term
life vs
whole life insurance.
However, the entire
whole life vs term
life argument is moot when you understand that you can actually design a
whole life policy with term insurance rider, allowing you to get both
whole and term
life insurance in ONE policy, instead of either / or.
Your point about the combination of work & social
life is probably the crux of the
whole argument.
Likewise, they prefer to debate urban heat island effects rather than to discuss the rising temperature trends, other clear signs of rising temperatures, the positive feedbacks which are beginning to kick in so that climate change will take on a
life of its own independently of what we do in the future if changes are not made now (# 111, «Storm World» post, comment # 141) and what such climate change will imply for humanity as a
whole (Curve manipulation, comment # 74, A Saturated Gassy
Argument, comment # 116).
And even then it is not easy — look only how hard
lived is that stupid
argument that the GHE for the Earth represents 33 °C that makes about as much sense as saying that a parabole is approximated by a horizontal line over the
whole space.
Well, since I am not an academic, and
live in the real world, the fact that the «
whole policy issues» do exist, and are being implemented by deluded progressive governments as we speak based precisely on «science» like this, I find your
argument irrelevant.
The
argument that permanent
life insurance is for your
whole life while while term
life policy is only for the
life of the term is actually irrelevant in our opinion.
He's gotten into
arguments on - air with insurance agents who suggest
whole life insurance.
But those
arguments for
whole life are outmatched by the
arguments against it.
One of the most common
arguments for
whole life is that it's not just a
life insurance policy, it's also an investment.
One of the main
arguments of
whole life insurance plans is that they build cash value.
I am still confused about (2) things: their claim of «renewable term policies without proving Insurability» and their
argument against
Whole Life that the Insured's beneficiaries do not receive BOTH the death benefit and the Cash Value.
However acknowledging this puts the
argument of why
whole life is good for retirement into a bit of a pickle.
to promote «
whole»
life insurance, we wrote it to point out the «silliness» of the argument that Term Life Insurance is a rip -
life insurance, we wrote it to point out the «silliness» of the
argument that Term
Life Insurance is a rip -
Life Insurance is a rip - off.
Taking these
arguments one by one, these are the reasons why it is not actually a risk to buy a term
life insurance policy instead of
whole life.
(A good
argument can be made to choose
whole life insurance for children.)
The typical
argument on term vs
whole life regarding how long each lasts goes something like this:
Our goal in this article is to help dispel the lies and misinformation as we attempt to demystify the misguided
argument between term
life vs
whole life insurance.
I just read a CNN article refuting the
argument that
whole life insurance is better than term.
In order to make this
argument really stand on it's own, there has to be some discussion of the cash value growth that is available to the
whole life policy holder.
The
argument of buying term and investing the difference is based on the premise of getting cheap term and taking the extra money (you would have spent on
whole life) and investing it in the market.
Let's also take a serious look at what us older folks
life insurance needs really are and, why not, let's take a look at the age old
argument of term versus
whole life.
Back then it was simply an
argument against
whole life, the «difference» being between the cost of term and
whole life.
And even though the
argument could be used that you are still young, keep in mind that the earlier in
life a
whole life policy is purchased, the lower the premiums will be.