Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S]
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220561 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 08:57
ToolPackinMama  
George Peatty wrote:
> On 21 Feb 2006 22:28:01 -0800, "Bozo the Evil Klown" <Evilklowwn [at] aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>People can be closer than just friends- closer than *family*- without
>>the slightest sexual or romantic element involved.
>
>
> YES!

I agree... but that's not the case with Kirk and Spock.

NOTE: I never asserted that all m-m relationships are inevitably
sexual. People who state or imply as much are being (stupidly)
deceptive. Anyone who falls for such tactics is IMHO a sad (but funny)
lackwit.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220562 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 10:17
al019  
George Peatty (peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net) wrote:
: On 22 Feb 2006 10:22:15 -0800, "Led4Aces" <Led4acs [at] aol.com> wrote:

: >Why are u quoting a work of fiction (and a bad one at that) to support
: >your position?

: It is the same rationale in which you quote from Star Trek - a work of
: fiction - to support yours.

: As for it being a bad one, that is manifest proof you have never read it. On
: its literary merits alone, the Bible is unsurpassed.

Yes and no. Some portions of the Bible make for excellent reading, but
others are tedius and certainly does not represent the best literary
history has to offer. These portions are important for historical reasons
only. There's the numerous geneology listings--very dull stuff, and that
reaches its worst point in the entire first half of First Chronicles.
There are the endless "laws" found in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Deuteronomy. Numbers also includes the two countings of the people that
give the book its name. There's the tedious instructions on how to build
the Ark of the Covenent near the end of Exodus, immediately followed by
the description of the people building it, during which the entirity of
the instructions are repeated as each one is followed.

So, important as a historical document? Yes, the Bible is extremely
important in telling us the history of of the people of Judah, though it
combines both history and myth into one--as well as the history of early
Christianity. Unfortunately on both counts it's hard to decipher fact
from fiction.

Unsurpassed work of literature? Not really, though there are some very
beautiful passages, the tedium of others takes it out of that category.
Now, take Shakespeare...!

Brad
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220563 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 10:18
al019  
ToolPackinMama (laura [at] lauragoodwin.org) wrote:
: George Peatty wrote:
: > On 22 Feb 2006 10:22:15 -0800, "Led4Aces" <Led4acs [at] aol.com> wrote:
: >
: >
: >>Why are u quoting a work of fiction (and a bad one at that) to support
: >>your position?
: >
: >
: > It is the same rationale in which you quote from Star Trek - a work of
: > fiction - to support yours.
: >
: > As for it being a bad one, that is manifest proof you have never read it. On
: > its literary merits alone, the Bible is unsurpassed.

: I think the Bible lacks literary merit. It's virtually unreadable.
: God's a crummy writer. Stephen King, a mere mortal, is more fluent,
: and BTW much more prolific.

God didn't write it anyway. He couldn't have contradicted himself so
much.

BRad
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220564 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 10:19
al019  
ToolPackinMama (laura [at] lauragoodwin.org) wrote:
: George Peatty wrote:

: > Ig you think we're still bound to obey the entire levitical law, read Acts
: > 15, Galatians 1, and all of Hebrews ..

: ::sigh::

: Sermon on the mount, anyone?

Sure, I'm game. Who's going to play Jesus?

Brad
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220565 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 10:43
Kweeg  
"Brad Filippone" <al019 [at] chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
news:dtp7fr$sh$3 [at] News.Dal.Ca...
> ToolPackinMama (laura [at] lauragoodwin.org) wrote:
> : George Peatty wrote:
>
> : > Ig you think we're still bound to obey the entire levitical law, read
Acts
> : > 15, Galatians 1, and all of Hebrews ..
>
> : ::sigh::
>
> : Sermon on the mount, anyone?
>
> Sure, I'm game. Who's going to play Jesus?

What's 'e sayn'?

Something about the cheesemakers....

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
http://members.shaw.ca/iksbloodoath
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
"So say we all!"
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220566 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 10:59
Led4Aces  
On 22 Feb 2006 10:22:15 -0800, "Led4Aces" <Led4... [at] aol.com> wrote:
>Why are u quoting a work of fiction (and a bad one at that) to support
>your position?

From: George Peatty
It is the same rationale in which you quote from Star Trek - a work of
fiction - to support yours.>>>>>>>>

Oh really? And what exactly is my position?


<<From: George Peatty
As for it being a bad one, that is manifest proof you have never read
it. On its literary merits alone, the Bible is unsurpassed. >>>>>>>

The bible has been used to justify more evil deeds than all other
documents or texts combined. So yes it is unsurpassed. As a cause of
misery.

But there is no convincing you, that much I know. It's your crutch.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220567 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 17:20
George Peatty  
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 00:11:12 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:


> How wicked must one be in order to burn with the wicked?

The smallest white lie is sufficient.

> Which stains are too tough for the blood of Christ to get out?

Only the ones that are unrepented of.

> What is the upper limit on the power of the Crucifixion?

The throne of God ..
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220568 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 17:42
nunca  
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:20:21 -0500, George Peatty
<peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 00:11:12 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:
>
>
>> How wicked must one be in order to burn with the wicked?
>
> The smallest white lie is sufficient.
>
>> Which stains are too tough for the blood of Christ to get out?
>
> Only the ones that are unrepented of.
>
>> What is the upper limit on the power of the Crucifixion?
>
> The throne of God ..


My love is greater than God's.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220569 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 18:05
George Peatty  
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:

>My love is greater than God's.

Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220570 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 19:28
ToolPackinMama  
Brad Filippone wrote:

> Unsurpassed work of literature? Not really, though there are some very
> beautiful passages, the tedium of others takes it out of that category.
> Now, take Shakespeare...!

Especially in the original Klingon.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220571 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 19:29
ToolPackinMama  
Brad Filippone wrote:
> ToolPackinMama (laura [at] lauragoodwin.org) wrote:

> : I think the Bible lacks literary merit. It's virtually unreadable.
> : God's a crummy writer. Stephen King, a mere mortal, is more fluent,
> : and BTW much more prolific.
>
> God didn't write it anyway. He couldn't have contradicted himself so
> much.

I thought God could do anything... except write well.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220572 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 22:29
Marcovaldo  
"Brad Filippone" <al019 [at] chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
news:dtp7b7$sh$1 [at] News.Dal.Ca...
> There's the tedious instructions on how to build
> the Ark of the Covenent

"Inserteth Tab A verily unto Slot B"

> Now, take Shakespeare...!

Please!
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220573 ] Sa, 25 Februar 2006 22:49
nunca  
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
<peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:
>
>>My love is greater than God's.
>
>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..


You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220574 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 00:39
Snake  
"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
> <peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:
>>
>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>
>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>
>
> You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.

,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220575 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 01:00
nunca  
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:39:05 GMT, "Snake"
<fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:

>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
>> <peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro) wrote:
>>>
>>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>>
>>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>>
>>
>> You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
>
>,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
>over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
>


Nope . . . it's because he seems to feel he is holier-than-I.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220576 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 07:39
Snake  
"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
news:tbr102tk3c91ogqlug9ubph2fjqq01vvjk [at] 4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:39:05 GMT, "Snake"
> <fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:
>
>>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>>news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
>>> <peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>>>
>>>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>>>
>>>
>>> You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
>>
>>,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
>>over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
>>
>
>
> Nope . . . it's because he seems to feel he is holier-than-I.

I thought that's what I said! :p ^_^
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220577 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 09:24
ToolPackinMama  
Snake wrote:
> "SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
> news:tbr102tk3c91ogqlug9ubph2fjqq01vvjk [at] 4ax.com...
>
>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:39:05 GMT, "Snake"
>><fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>>>news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
>>>><peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro)
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
>>>
>>>,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
>>>over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
>>>
>>
>>
>>Nope . . . it's because he seems to feel he is holier-than-I.
>
>
> I thought that's what I said! :p ^_^

I'm holier than all y'all. I'm a effin' SAINT! :)
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220578 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 09:37
Captain Kundalini  
And I'm tired of this entire fucking subject.
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220579 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 11:59
nunca  
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 06:39:52 GMT, "Snake"
<fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:

>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>news:tbr102tk3c91ogqlug9ubph2fjqq01vvjk [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:39:05 GMT, "Snake"
>> <fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:
>>
>>>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>>>news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
>>>> <peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro)
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>>>>
>>>>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
>>>
>>>,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
>>>over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nope . . . it's because he seems to feel he is holier-than-I.
>
>I thought that's what I said! :p ^_^
>


Oh . . . ok. :)

( I wasn't sure.)
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220580 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 11:58
nunca  
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:37:12 GMT, "Captain Kundalini"
<captkundalini [at] hot.rr.com> wrote:

>And I'm tired of this entire fucking subject.
>

Then don't participate. :)
Re: Quick "Star Trek" - "Brokeback Mountain" comparison [K/S] [message #220581 ] So, 26 Februar 2006 12:01
nunca  
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 03:24:41 -0500, ToolPackinMama
<laura [at] lauragoodwin.org> wrote:

>Snake wrote:
>> "SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>> news:tbr102tk3c91ogqlug9ubph2fjqq01vvjk [at] 4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 23:39:05 GMT, "Snake"
>>><fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"SrEspectro" <nunca [at] hogar.mundo> wrote in message
>>>>news:o6k102pd2mvkr0vtg8b5rqdh2477d1t682 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:22 -0500, George Peatty
>>>>><peattyg47-1230 [at] copper.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:42:49 -0500, nunca [at] hogar.mundo (SrEspectro)
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My love is greater than God's.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Apparently, your holiness is somewhat lacking, however ..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You must forgive me . . . you have me at a disadvantage.
>>>>
>>>>,,,because he and his similar fellow have proclaimed themselves sovereigns
>>>>over all because they use the word "God" in their sentences??????
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Nope . . . it's because he seems to feel he is holier-than-I.
>>
>>
>> I thought that's what I said! :p ^_^
>
>I'm holier than all y'all. I'm a effin' SAINT! :)


Are you of the body?


=-=

You know, Sarek once said . . .

"We shall always retain the best part of the other inside us."

But this can not be true, or I'd have never gotten my penis back.

[ Rimshot ]
Vorheriges Thema:Just watched a cool VOY Episode
Nächstes Thema:Starfleet - The First Era PbEM Group
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Sa Mai 19 16:41:50 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,05682 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered