It seems to me that socialists today can preserve their position in academic economics merely by the pretense that the differences are entirely moral questions about which science cannot decide.

In questions of science the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.

The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?

Science is wonderfully equipped to answer the question 'How?' but it gets terribly confused when you ask the question 'Why?'

It's a sad indication of where Washington has come where policy differences almost necessarily become questions of integrity. I came to Washington in the late '70s and people had the ability in the past to have intense policy differences but didn't feel the need to question the other person's character.

The question I love to get asked is: 'What's the hardest part of your job?' And literally the answer is probably real sad but it's to just to be me. Like it's really hard because I think people you know have a set idea of what a pop star should be.

The respect for human rights is nowadays not so much a matter of having international standards but rather questions of compliance with those standards.

I respect the president. He and I have a difference of opinion on how to help the country we both love. But the question each of us wants the voters to answer is who will be the better president not who is the better American.

Facts matter. Science matters. Reason matters. Mitt Romney has shown an inability to respect any of the three. President Barack Obama not only respects them he relies on them. He is an overwhelming and unquestioned choice to continue as president.

The question of religion was a matter for each individual's conscience and in a great many cases was the outcome of birth or residence in a certain geographical area.

I'm a modern Muslim. I pray and if I have a question I ask someone who is more educated in the religion than me.

I am fascinated with religion or things that people believe in and question that. I think it's interesting.

A lot of people have questioned how yoga and their own spiritual beliefs can come together. Yoga actually pre-dates religion.

Religion survives because it answers three questions that every reflective person must ask. Who am I? Why am I here? How then shall I live?

Religion is run by thought police. 'Obey. Listen. This is what you do. Don't ask questions. Go die for your country.' The spirituality says 'Okay you can die for your country but know what you're doing while you're doing it.'

Attacks on a politician's identity - questioning Romney's religion say or Obama's birthplace - tend to come when an opponent is desperate and can't sell himself.

What is especially important is addressing the question of how religion can be enforced through political means and what can be done to create a political environment that on the one hand acknowledges the role of religion in society while on the other hand does not impose one religion on the populace at the expense of all others.

I also like to look at the dynamic that takes place between religion and science because in a way both are asking the same questions: Who are we? Where do we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? The methodologies are diametrically opposed but their motivation is the same the wellspring is the same in both cases.

After all enforced national bilingualism in this country isn't mere policy. It has attained the status of a religion. It's a dogma which one is supposed to accept without question.

Religion is the state of being grasped by an ultimate concern a concern which qualifies all other concerns as preliminary and which itself contains the answer to the question of a meaning of our life.

There is one question that I don't think Gary Condit can answer and that I think is why we all aimed at Gary Condit besides the fact that he has a relationship.

It was a good 15 or 20 years before anyone at Rand would be in the same room with me. They didn't want the question raised 'What's your relationship with Daniel Ellsberg?' And not one of them wrote me a letter because they didn't want a letter of theirs to show up in my trash - which the FBI had been going through.

Mandatory auditor rotation is designed to address a potential conflict of interest between a public company and its auditor. Because an auditor is hired and paid by the public company it audits the auditor's desire to maintain a good relationship with its client could conflict with its duty to rigorously question the client's financial statements.

I especially object to having my character assassinated by reference to events from my past which bear absolutely no relationship to the question of who the anthrax killer is.