The phrase "argue section" is not correct and does not convey a clear meaning in written English.
It may be intended to refer to a part of a text where arguments are presented, but it lacks clarity and specificity.
Example: "In the argue section of the paper, the author presents various viewpoints on the issue."
Alternatives: "argument section" or "debate section".
Cohen said the cable company "fully embraces the open internet principles that the president and the chairman of the FCC have espoused" but argued section 706 of the telecommunications act – the regulatory legislation preferred by the cable and telecoms industry "provides more than ample authority to impose those rules".
Again, Hirsch argues section 8(a)(2) should be abolished to accommodate this.
As Plumwood argues (Section 2.4), a rejection of the culture-nature dualism has implications for an ecofeminist conception of the self: humans are both individual selves that are distinct from nature and ecological selves that are continuous with nature (see also Mathews 1994b; Cuomo 2005).
But, she argues, Section 230 was written two decades ago, when interactions on the internet were relatively rare, and before people were routinely using the web to get everything from jobs to transportation to shelter to sex.
It could be argued that section B Pharmacology, Section D Radiotherapy and Section E Surgery of part one belong to part two; however in these sections we have tried to focus on one discipline and in part two, we have tried to focus on the results of multidisciplinary trials.
The Christian Institute thinks that Section 28 should not merely be retained, but extended to bring health authorities within its ambit.The repealers argue that Section 28 should go because it is a bad law.
House leaders argue that section raises the possibility that the bill could affect government revenue, making it necessary for it to originate in the House.
Critics argue that Section 5 gives unprecedented and unconstitutional power to the federal government over election matters that should be the province of the states.
They also argue that Section 5 is no longer needed, citing not only President Obama's election but the thousands of African Americans who serve in public office at all levels.
Many argue that Section 702 violates the Fourth Amendment's provision forbidding unreasonable searches and seizures without a warrant.
