A Quote by Lisa Belkin

Time was when medicine could do very little for critically ill or dying patients. Now it can do too much. Where to draw the line is the subject of a broad, heated debate throughout the country, a debate that becomes louder with each new medical miracle or impossible case.
Ventilators can be reused but hospitals need a sufficient supply to treat critically ill patients while still allowing enough time for each ventilator to be refurbished between patients.
One theme that fascinates me is cognitive enhancement. It seems only a matter of time until we live in a world where steroids for the brain are readily available to all. And once we come to grips with that reality, I suspect the debate over the ethics will be much more heated than the debate over steroids in baseball or any other sport, where the use is limited to a select group of freakish athletes.
Trump crossed the line all the time. Flustered during the debate because he couldn't out-debate Clinton on policy, he just leaned into the mic and dismissed her entirely: 'nasty woman.'
During the debate, Bush was asked by a lady to name three mistakes he's made. And Bush responded, this debate, the last debate and the next debate.
If a woman MP's choice of clothing becomes a topic of a heated debate, then all the talk of women empowerment is rubbish.
I want there to be an open and positive debate about the path the country will now take. Whatever the verdict of that debate I will respect it.
In all our academies we attempt far too much. ... In earlier times lectures were delivered upon chemistry and botany as branches of medicine, and the medical student learned enough of them. Now, however, chemistry and botany are become sciences of themselves, incapable of comprehension by a hasty survey, and each demanding the study of a whole life, yet we expect the medical student to understand them. He who is prudent, accordingly declines all distracting claims upon his time, and limits himself to a single branch and becomes expert in one thing.
My view is instead of political discussions, persuasions, which dominate democracy, in our country we have taken our democracy to the other extreme. There is no debate, sufficient debate. There is court debate.
The politics of transgender identity are really complicated. And the debate over how much of gender is biological and how much of it is socially constructed is a very complex debate.
A Supreme Court ruling is supposed to provide clarity to contentious legal issues, but in the case of reproductive rights, it was just the beginning of a long, heated, and grueling debate.
I've always believed that the great strength of the Internet is that it allows us to communicate with each other, it allows debate. And I think that gay marriage is a huge step forward. But debate is throwing ideas about, and when it becomes sort of a weapon of character assassination, I think that's crazy. I think the situation in America is different from in England, where we have civil partnership, and now the vote on gay marriage has been carried, and whether it will go through Parliament I don't know.
The "family" has clearly emerged anew in the late 1970s as a central subject for discussion, debate, research and writing in bothscholarly and popular arenas. Anxiety over whether or not the family as a basic social institution is dying has diminished. In its stead has emerged a fairly broad consensus around the position that the family is "here to stay," but that it certainly is changing.
I didn't believe in Bigfoot.I just thought, "No, that would be impossible. You know, we would have found Bigfoot by now. We would've found some skeletons, we would've found some sort of proof of Bigfoot." So, I didn't believe for a long time, but obviously this is the year we find Bigfoot. And obviously all scientists agree that there's definitely Bigfoot.There's no reason to debate it. It's like debating climate change. There's no reason to debate climate change anymore. There's no reason to debate whether there's Bigfoot. Clearly, the yeti exists.
To pass to the deluge, and beyond it, and to come to close quarters with our proper division, the origin of Romance itself is a very debatable subject, or rather it is a subject which the wiser mind will hardly care to debate much.
Mitt Romney and I know the difference between protecting a program, and raiding it. Ladies and gentlemen, our nation needs this debate. We want this debate. We will win this debate.
We pretend that the debate about genetically modified crops is a debate about science when the reality is, actually, that the science is very clear. It is really a debate about values.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!