I voted against this Indian bill, and my conscience yet tells me that I gave a good, honest vote, and one that I believe will not make me ashamed in the day of judgment.
When we believe ourselves in possession of the only truth, we are likely to be indifferent to common everyday truths.
You have to believe in a placebo or it won't work, but if it works, it's obviously working in some indirect way, through feedback in the immune system, let us say, or in the willpower of the patient to take a more strenuous exercise in their own therapy.
I believe, basically, that individual freedom is very important.
Well, I'm a libertarian conservative, so I believe in limited government/maximum individual freedom.
I believe in trying to get a balance between individual freedom on the one hand and social responsibility on the other.
We believe in individual initiative, personal responsibility, opportunity, freedom, small government, the Constitution. These principles, these American principles are key to getting our economy back to being successful and leading the world.
America will nurture a new Muslim - one who can believe in Muhammad and the Quran but who abandons belief in a Shariah-based state and affirms the primary American value of individual liberty, which has not been a normative Islamic value.
We believe, as our founders did, that 'the pursuit of happiness' depends upon individual liberty; and individual liberty requires limited government.
The Democratic Party believes that health insurance is a social responsibility of the nation. I believe that health insurance is an individual responsibility. And that's a really hard philosophy to mesh.
I don't believe in quotas. America was founded on a philosophy of individual rights, not group rights.
I believe in individual rights so much that I don't like any sort of 'what's good for the cause'-type questions.
My main quarrel with liberalism is not that liberalism places great emphasis on individual rights - I believe rights are very important and need to be respected. The issue is whether it is possible to define and justify our rights without taking a stand on the moral and even sometimes religious convictions that citizens bring to public life.
We're in a very individual sport, but they like us not to be so individual. They'd rather have you look like every other cookie cutter guy and have you believe that you're replaceable when you're really not.
I'm a very individualistic person. That is why I don't belong to any political party or anything. I really believe in justice and freedom.
The dominant invades the entire picture, as it were. In this way I seek to individualize the color, because I have come to believe that there is a living world of each color and I express these worlds.
I see the 'z' in 'Humanz' as referring to robots, AI, programming, brainwashing, indoctrination. And it's a question to us: are we human, or are we humanz? Have we lost the ability to think for ourselves? Do we just believe what we're told? That's how I see it.
To address what seems like an endless cycle of gender inequity in media, I believe we need to think beyond what our industry has already tried to do through mentorships and internships. We need to stop talking and start moving the needle, and one solution is to simply give women jobs.
We only do harm to ourselves when we harbor resentment and vitriol toward another. I do believe that everything is forgivable; some things are inexcusable but forgivable.
If legislators come to believe that police power is an ever-present constitutional trump card they can play whenever it suits them, overreaching is inexorable.
