Posted on 10/20/2005 8:40:00 PM PDT by nitejohnboy
O well... If anyone was interested:
Tiberius Kirk would be a Church on the Tiber [River]. As in, the Vatican, for instance. "Romulans" would be the original settlers of Rome.
Of course, that IS mixing source langauges. Like Neo Anderson, the New Son of Man, in the Matrix.
I wouldn't read TOO much into it, though.
Star Trek also featured a man named Montgomery SCOTT fighting KLING-ONS.
(It's a toilet-paper joke.)
Did it ever occur to you that this is quite peculiar?
Check out Alexander Campbell and the Christian Church for an education ~ you would appear to need it.
Interesting thing, Ms. Miers is a former Catholic, and is now a member of an independent Christian Church.
How can that be?
Hmmmm?
Maybe there is a church (or church group) which is identified as the "Christian Church" ~ and it has various names, e.g. Christian Church, Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), Christian Church (Noninstrumental) ~ and that one is frequently identified as Church of Christ.
You should get out more often; see the world; talk to people.
Dang it, the last fun thread I got involved in also degenerated into theological bickering. Sigh
You are always kind to NOT point out my obvious typos and poor spelling habits Speedy. For that reason you are thus heralded my favorite freeper! ;] (hehe)
Remember all that political capital????? I meant to say its spent and done with. Lame Duck.
Aw shucks. I'll bet you say that to all the Freepers. Right back at you -- and right off to work for me! Catch you later.
No.
Ever have an opportunity to down a Lone Star or two with buddies?
Wait until Miers has had a couple of terms on the SC along with Roberts and whoever replaces Stevens. Some of you guys will be saying how you knew that Bush was right all along.
Bush isn't as conservative as many of us would like, if he was he wouldn't have been elected. I have a real problem with his open arms immigration policy and his big spending programs myself. But he is socially conservative, and I don't believe he is going to put an activist, pro-abort, pro-gay marriage, anti-2nd Amendment Justice on the SC. He has said over and over that he wants originalist Justices who will make decisions according to the Constitution as written and not as they might like it to be re-written. I believe him, and even though I would rather have had Luttig or Brown I think Miers is probably as good as anyone who could be confirmed by the current Senate with 7 RINOs holding the balance of power.
A lot of conservatives would like to have seen a televised Senate food-fight that ended with clymers like Schumer and Biden getting smacked down with the nuke option. That would have been fun to watch, but I would rather get an unknown originalist seated on the court than to watch a fight my guys might not win. In case you haven't noticed, there is not a conservative majority in the Senate. Several Senators with an R after their names don't really want any more SC Justices cut from the same cloth as Scalia and Thomas.
Check out comment #190.
That chick is a MAN Baybee!
you said she left the Catholic Church to join the christian church. You understand that there are people who don't believe that Catholics are Christian, right?
Now, given these facts, I do not think it was so irrational for me to believe you were stating that Catholics aren't christians.
I've had Lone Star. Have you ever chased it down with a case of Grain Belt?
So, now you know. We were trying to keep that a secret ~ that way you could be surprised someday driving around Texas, or Indiana, or Tennessee ~ lot of 'em there. Set your head spinning.
Now, concerning Catholics, there are those who don't believe that an ex-Catholic can be a Christian!
Zoot, Alors!
Half our Bill of Rights was written in direct response to the abuses of Louis XIV who believed in such nonsense.
LOL! I would love driving through those states. Perhaps, some day.....
No, it was not irrational. 3 little words of mine just staing the fact that Catholics are Christians was not irrational. I may have been wrong over what you meant but in no way was it irrational for me to believe that you were stating catholics were not christians.
So I was wrong and u clarified and now I accept. No reason for you to get angry about anything. Geez.....
whether there are catholics who believe ex-catholics cannot be christians is besides the point. I don't believe it and never said anything that can be interpreted as such. Calm down a bit, would u? ;-)
btw, what does zoot, alors mean? never heard or read about it ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.