What is perception and the contra indications plus pros and cons?

Answer 1

Perception varies as to the individual holding such perception, so the contra-indications to such perceptions then thusly also fit into realm of individual discovery as to the measure of these differing perceptions, which contra-indication by meaning, does call for such understanding.

An example in medical terminology, a contra-indication in relations to medicines, calls for the factual understanding of being that two medicines that cannot react well together, so should not be used together, contra-indication, disharmony.

As it is stated above by you, in the mention of such contra-indication, one does not have to assume by varied perceptions as to analyze such, that being my personal assumptions as for your need to post the above "question", but only to have the simple awareness as to the meaning of contra-indication, which may allow one to give need as to try and grasp the concept of perception itself, and by the ease in the way to the opinions by those who feel two perceptions are contra-indicative towards each other.

So, I must now confess my assumptions here, which is by and through fact, my inability to find it even in my most thoughful comprehension, the realization of harmony with your beliefs of such contra-indication, because through my assumptions, is the leads to your quest as to the answers of pros regarding these topics in question you provide, made unclear, and so then I find myself wishing to find understanding in this lack of clarity behind the question you pose, and so this allows me to provide only an example that should logically ring with the most soundness, and with most clarity, to you, as to my assumption by your avatar, and the que seemingly begged for, and understood by the direction of question and present global circumstances, the lending to the probability of my assumption being correct, that the present place of geographical location in which you live, is why you made this post.

Based on this assumption, I can very easily point out by the fact, and display of these facts of harmony via historical knowledge, that within the Muslim population, fifty percent of Muslim's now do live within some democratic form of society and governance, and so through the very quick and simple analysis of history of this population, this half, shows extremely large numbers in such harmony, and so I will mention of last count, by way of total Muslim population, to better aid in the answering of your question, this count totals six-hundred fifty million people.

So therein lies my opinion by only the way of my assumption, which I hope is correct, so as to both fulfill your need for the answer to such question, and also to fulfill my need for the hopes that you understand what I am trying to say, and so then finally and hopefully allowing you, to allow yourself, to see as an individual, my perception.

Since I feel the lean of such assumption, my perception, is towards both your real intent as to this posts purpose, this also then not only answers your question, as to the pros,( or advantages) in the understanding of my perception, but most certainly should allow you now, a better and more fluid ease in the ability to allow into your realm of thinking, the discovery of this measure of harmony, by fact, which so then cancels out, if this is your meaning for post, opinions of any religion within a democratic governance, both being already proven to be congruent to each other as towards harmony, en masse, within this democratic style of governance, and so should also easily therefore allow one to find it very logical to then just cross off the contra-indication portion of your above statement, masked as a question, altogether and completely, in your understanding.

The cons you ask for above, in regards to your question, and in regards to my assumption as to the reasoning behind your post, and from all I have mentioned above, as to contra-indication, simply rests within the basic lack of understanding of all included in the above post I took time to try and make most clear to you.

In America, we have a common sense phrase, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Please tell me now so that I may try and learn, what is your perception of both my assumption as to your posts reasoning, and of this phrase?

Answer 2

Definitely pro. Part of being free is the freedom to adequately defend yourself, as well as enjoy the SAFE use of firearms (hunting, target shooting, ect.). I do feel that you should have both a clean criminal record as well as mental to own a weapon. I also feel there should be harsher penalties for any crimes involving firearms, from murders to armed robberies to criminal possession. People need to be taught and reminded of the responsibilities of our freedom to bear arms. People can say guns kill, but in all honesty, if you eliminate guns the people that are killing will more than likely find some other way (stabbing, explosives, ect.). Taking the gun away doesn't change the killer, only the method. Edit @ srinule: Your arguement is hollow. Anything can technically be used as a weapon, from a stick to a gun, even a cross. It's in the manner of which it is used. Also, religion doesn't matter either. I've known numerous people within the church community who enjoyed hunting, skeet shooting, and target shooting. It is not a crime or sin to own a gun (or any other form of legal "weapon"), only the manner to which it is used.

Answer 3

Contraindication: A condition which makes a particular treatment or procedure inadvisable. A contraindication may be absolute or relative. Perception: the ability to identify, interpret, and attach meaning. Pros and cons...the good and the bad of an idea/concept/treatment!