Not exact matches
I had
wondered how politically savvy supporters of «gay marriage» would react to the recent statement entitled «Beyond Same - Sex Marriage,» and how they would respond to my posting last week calling attention to the fact that the statement follows through on the
logic of demands for legal recognition of same - sex unions
by endorsing relationships involving multiple (i.e., more than two) sex partners.
Seeing how the grammatical errors made
by these particular students are often rooted in the
logic of their native languages and how a teacher who understands something about that
logic and that culture can sensitively respond in context - specific ways may lead teacher candidates to develop cognitive flexibility as they
wonder what other patterns in student writing (and their own) are the result of where they grew up and how they can take that into account when writing feedback.
What historians will definitely
wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed
logic, obscured
by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet - destroying toxin.
Even though this is not the place for a detailed discussion, I do
wonder:
By what
logic is something that is clearly an agreement in the contract law sense of the word not an agreement for competition law purposes?
Given these huge «misses»
by OTLA, one has to
wonder if it did any «research» at all, and whether its fierce opposition is grounded more in emotion, than evidence and
logic.