Jimmy Deyoung's Argument

In the article ‘Calgary man shows medical record as proof of election night assault’, by Aaron Chatha, Chris Ball recounts his attack that occurred on November 8th 2016, and has now provided the public with medical records indicating the treatment he received as a result. Since Mr. Ball has come forward with the details of the attack, there has been public outcry in regards to the assailants justifying their actions as they attacked Mr. Ball. Following the attack, the Santa Monica Police Department issued a statement. Within the statement police allude that Chris Ball was drinking at a bar where everyone was watching the election. As the polls began to come in people started shouting homophobic slurs, where Mr. Ball got into it with his attackers.

A strong point in Jim DeMint’s argument was, that the larger the government the gets the larger the national debt increases. A weak point in his argument was that “Almost everything our federal government attempts to do becomes a disaster”. It is very ironic for a person who served in the federal government to say it's terrible, it is also a very vague statement. I disagree with Jim DeMint for multiple reasons. The first being that he says that the government should stop spending but, then goes on to say we should spend more money on an already large military. Also he says that the government is using global warming as an excuse to expand its power but, there are many people (especially environmentalists) that would argue that it is not doing

Because of a new arrangement that was established between Abram and God, the nation of Israel begins to grow and to move forward in their relationship.

Dave thinks he is almost a man because he buys himself a gun and by having this gun he thinks it will gain the other men's respect. He is tired of getting grief from the men he works with. He believes he will be transformed into a real man by having a gun, but he quickly realizes that it is only bringing him problems and more responsibility. Dave sees that he is not ready for adulthood because of the responsibilities and obligations that come with it. He wants the freedom that he is led to believe that adults have. I do not think that his actions are those of an adult because I think that his mind set is childish since he thinks that a gun is going to make him seem more like an adult and not a child anymore. There is a lot more that comes with being an adult than just having a gun. Guns are dangerous and should be used in the right way. I do not agree with his action of shooting Mr. Hawkins' mule and it could have seemed that he was striking against Mr. Hawkins. I think the reason that he thinks that a gun will make him a man is because he feels it is a quick way for him to become powerful and manly. He believes that having a gun in his hand will give him more control over

Reflect on several ways in which the contemporary nation state of Israel may be viewed by various Christian communities.

In any series of random events an extraordinary event is most likely to be followed, due purely to chance, by a more ordinary one.

However, one can use past events and the immutable laws of human nature to look ahead and see if present events meet the standard of an historic turning point. In the case of present events one can make an educated guess as to the consequences of the two choices before you.

Over the years, firms have increasingly been maximising shareholder value. However, Steve Denning, a former director of the World Bank, author of six leadership and management books and columnist for Forbes, disagrees. His article “The Origin of the ‘World’s Dumbest Idea’: Milton Friedman”, was published on June 26, 2013 on Forbes, debates against Friedman’s argument that the social responsibility of corporations is to make money for its shareholders. The main issue here is whether the maximisation of shareholder value as the guiding principle of executives is detrimental to the corporation. Although Denning has exhibited valid points in his argument, his lack of citation, biased view on most arguments and his tone has dampened the credibility

An argument is deductively valid if and only if its premises are true and always lead to a true conclusion. (Dolson, HO #3, p.1) Premise A, “If Abraham Lincoln was a friend of John Wilkes Booth, then John Wilkes Booth would not kill Abraham Lincoln.” is true. Premise B, “Abraham Lincoln was not friends with John Wilkes booth.” is also true. But, the conclusion supposes that because John Wilkes Booth and Lincoln were not friends, Booth would kill Abraham Lincoln. There are multiple ways to show an argument is invalid. One test is Dan Dolson's Test for Validity (D.D.T.V.). To use D.D.T.V. we must pretend the premises are true and find a way in which the conclusion can be false (Dolson, #3, p.1). We have already stated the premises are true so there is no need to pretend, but the test still works. We can easily imagine a situation in which Booth and Lincoln are not friends where Booth does not kill Lincoln. Therefore, using the D.D.T.V. we can conclude that the argument is invalid.

In the fourth chapter, “Fouling Our Own Nests,” of Unquenchable: America’s Water Crisis and What to do About It, Robert Glennon discusses the dangers of water contamination that plague many parts of the United States. His main claim that water pollution requires the help of the entire population stems from an unmentioned warrant: contaminating the national water supply with chemicals from individual communities and industries is detrimental to American society. In order to strengthen his argument, Glennon showcases the impacts of local contamination issues on larger populations and utilizes quantitatively intimidating statistics to solidify his position and inspire his readers to fight for better water regulation.

A strong written argument is supported by several methods that are used to legitimize the author’s position as well as to discredit any counterargument brought forth. The techniques include introducing a counterargument and weakening it’s position with evidence. Providing legitimate academic research such as statistics as well as anecdotes from scholars on the given subject can reinforce the author’s argument. Another important method used is requiring the reader to critically think about a subject brought forth by challenging their preconceived ideas about a topic. This may also include using hidden assumptions that use implicit statements which have a certain opinion such as “If I follow the rules, good things will happen”, this is common

It is imperative to concede that we are approaching the end times; and, the inimitable exactitude of the prophetical attributes of Scripture. “Ezekiel wrote his book some 2,600 years ago (in Old Testament times), Islam did not come into being until the seventh century A.D. This means that at the time Ezekiel wrote his book, the conditions for unification of these nations did not exist.” The bulk of the nations revealed in this specific prophecy are also referred to in the record of nations found in Genesis 10, this record hosts an inventory of Noah’s sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth. This emanates following the post Noetic Flood directives to “replenish the earth” (Gen. 9), as well as, afore the dispersion (Gen. 11) at Babel. Gen 10:2-5 references the seven lads of Japheth while mid-chapter attends to the four stems of Ham’s offspring (10:6-20); finally referencing the lads of Shem (10:21-31).

Nehemiah the Israelite leader displays numerous traits of a Servant Leader in the biblical book, Nehemiah. Nehemiah sets out on a quest to rebuild the city of Jerusalem and the wall that surrounds his beloved home. During this time, he encounters many obstacles and will overcome all roadblocks put in front of him. This paper will provide an analysis of two significant events, building the wall around Jerusalem and organizing Jerusalem’s people to rebuild the city.

At the end of Genesis and into exodus, we see a God who is delivering a people out of slavery and promising this same people a literal land of their own. He promised to be their God. We find moving into exodus that Jacob and Joseph are dead. In Exodus, we see God taking the blessings of Egypt to Jacob and his seed making it bondage to prepare their heart to be His people. Deuteronomy teaches the people how they will live in the promised land. Moses was used of God to lead them out of Egypt and to prepare the new generation to be His people, but Moses could not enter the promised land (Deuteronomy 34:4, HCSB). As Deuteronomy ends God provides new leadership, but His words live on with the people. He continues to choose to work among them. They conquer the land He promised with His guidance and by their obedience to His commands. In conclusion, the storyline from

Even in the days of Jeroboam I, the man who founded the Kingdom of Israel, God already knew that Israel would be troublesome. It was forewarned that, “…the LORD will strike Israel, so that it will be like a reed swaying in the water. He will uproot Israel from this good land that he gave to their forefathers and scatter them beyond the River, because they provoked the LORD to anger by making Asherah poles.” The Israelites’ reason of doubt for God was that they were unsure that they could take over their promised land. God told them that they could remove the current inhabitants, but they were convinced that they could not. Not believing in the word of the Lord led to their exile for forty years of “wilderness wandering.” They had forgotten all of the great things that He had done for them, such as delivering them from Egyptian enslavement. Hope was given up on Him