Theunicornhunter

According to Fox news (just heard this) Stewart says he's said farewell to Picard forever.

Just rewatched "Cease Fire" - when the shuttle was going down T'Pol said they needed to reduce speed. Archer replied "the ground will do that for us"

I read there's an uproar about statements made by Senator Santorum - he allegedly equated homosexuality and polygamy. I've had aquestion on my mind for a couple of years (since Tom Green the talk show polygamist was convicted)

In this country it is acceptable for an unmarried man to procreate with several unmarried females at one time; there is no legal duty to be an active parent to those children. He can be required to pay child support if he can be located and is employed; however, these children often end up on welfare rolls. In some* polygamist families the parents are married, the father takes a roll in the child's life and often provides financial support. Explain why the latter is the one that goes to jail? (This assumes that all parties are consenting adults)

To answer this you have to answer what is "wrong."

1. Sleeping with more than one woman? (Why is it "wrong" if they are married but okay if they are not?)

2. Not being an involved parent?

3. Having children you know will end up on welfare? - I'm not talking about a mistake but a sustained lifestyle.

Children are harmed by being illegitimate - it increases the risk of poverty, it greatly decreases their chance of success in school and increases risk of delinquency. It makes me sad to think of the potential of their little lives being squandered because people don't take their actions seriously. I can't see why they shouldn't both go to jail. I also realize that some unmarried parents do take an active and supportive parental role and they would not be included in this group.

Why do you think one should be illegal and the other not?

I voted other for - Classical, next choices are New Age, Folk and Classic Rock

We all know that in ancient Greece, many men had both wives and male lovers, a custom that was acceptable in a non-Christian society..

There is a conception that the ancient Greeks were an enlightened society yet they owned slaves and the women in that society had very few rights - even compared to other cultures of the time. I don't think we need to look to them as role models.

Hard Choice - I think the original Law & Order is one of the best series ever in TV history. I watch the other two but the original is my favorite of the three. But I also like CSI, and I like both of them; and CSI Miami is based in Florida. I loved the scene in the introductory episode (on the original series) where the diver had to have an officer standing on 'gator watch.

I also think Stargate is terrific and I'm so glad Dr. Jackson is coming back. And I like Enterprise - but the catsuit bothers me. Now Dr. Carter from Stargate is a great female officer.

And I loved "Nero Wolfe" on A&E; Timothy Hutton was doll and they cancelled it.

I would like to see competent females in non-sexist clothing. Does that constitute a group?

I got tapped for the Reduction in Workforce going on our company. Sort of anticipated it but I am still in shock? Isn't it wonderful how they just say can you come with me and escort you to the door? Sorry for the personal post but I don't even have a cat to complain to. Anyone have any survivor stories that have been through this?

Let's lighten up the mood. What funny moments do you remember from Star Trek? I think some of the lines from Spock and McCoy are the greatest. T'Pol's line to Suvol about humans ear envy was funny...oh and I left Trip's "shut up" to the "fish-bait" alien off the list.

I think the big word here in this discussion is "tolerance". Tolerance is not "acceptance". I can be very tolerant of someone as to their beliefs and practices and yet not accept their beliefs and practices.

 

Ktrek

I think you've made an important distinction on this point. You can treat a person with respect, even love and care for them without necessarily agreeing with their actions or beliefs. However, I don't think most people define "tolerance" the way you do. In fact, "tolerance" is generally taught as mandated approval.

I also think people confuse the term liberal and open-minded. Let me give an example. I graduated from the University of Utah (Salt Lake City) with a BS in Psychology. Contrary to what you may think the school (at least the Psych dept) wasn't especially fond of the local religious community - which makes the following more interesting. During one of my classes one of the professors who worked with family counseling made the following observation. Some parents prided themselves on being tolerant; they could take purple hair, safety pins in the cheeks, drugs, dropping out of school, teenage sex - whatever. They were opened minded parents....but heaven forbid should one of those children want to join the Mormon church. The parents would go ballistic - threaten to disown the children whatever.

Captain, maybe I'm cynical but I think there is as much chance for the diversity you're looking for in Star Trek as there is for these parents to accept their children's choice.

I too am troubled by the cavalier way ST dismisses religion as something humans will out-grow. As I mentioned in another thread - that is what bothers me - not that they don't have religious characters but that they just dismiss something of vast importance to a great many people.

I saw one of those TOS miniskirt uniforms at the Smithsonian a few years ago. Either Americans are bigger than they were 30 years ago and they cinched those actresses into corsets - cause that thing was tiny.

I thought Archer and Trip looked pretty fine in Canamar -

I miss Tom Paris, I know the Voyager crew didn't "die" but they went away. I loved Tom's enthusiasm - he was always creating holodec programs or trying to liven things up and I miss his banter with the doctor. The closest thing we have now is Trip and movie night. Gee, we never got to see Tom be a dad.

Let's hear it for the Sunshine State (Florida). . I was born here, moved away because small towns are so boooooring - then realized that shoveling snow is worse than boring and came back.

I'm not going to get mad at you but Tom hadn't grown up yet when he thought that he loved Kes. I'm with Tom and B'Elanna all the way, I truly disagree with your theory. It would be funny to see Trip and B'Elanna in Engineering together, battling for seniority. But I can't see them as a couple.   

I was referring to the time travel episode where Tom and Kes were married in the future after B'Elanna was killed in an enemy attack. Of course, Kes' time travel changed the future and B'Elanna was never killed. But it was an interesting episode - one of my favorites. And they made a great couple.

As far as getting mad - I understand I feel the same way when they try to push Hoshi on poor Trip - he deserves so much better.

I liked Tom Paris/Kes - I loved the story with the alternate time line where they got married; I know he ended up with B'Elanna but that never worked for me. Tom was just the sort of guy you'd expect to fall for a petite, blond, soft spoken, caretaker type. He didn't strike me as the type to go for a kick-butt, I can do it myself Klingon. H'mmmm too bad we couldn't see Trip and B'Elanna butt heads - that would be interesting.

Sure have to be a lot of crewman working with the food if the mess is like a restaurant..

And surely there must be more then one cook, don't you agree?

I've had the same thought. Surely Chef gets time off...

Since some of you seem interested in romantic interludes here's a poll for past romances.

I was upset they killed off Ambassador K'Ehyler; Worf's mate. She was cool and made a real contribution to the Star Trek universe. I also really hated to see Vedic Bariel die on DS9 - I really liked his character; Spock's death in ST II was the most emotional death for me but I can't say I miss him too much since he came back.

They would be winningly romantic. ....I'm convinced that she and Trinneer would be terrific together if paired.

Do you have any idea how much you're depressing me? I look forward to Enterprise and I love Trip's scenes (okay Trip's my favorite). But if he gets lovey dovey with Hoshi I'm outta there.

They nominated A Night In Sickbay for a drama award. I am in shock - I don't know what to say

Makes sense. Sad to say, organized religion has made a mess out of things. The only way I can see a peaceful earth like the one on Star Trek is if everyone was either of the same religion or none at all.

Getting rid of religion sounds more like a "Brave New World" scenario than an advanced society. I don't believe you will ever have peace where you don't have freedom. No one can deny that historically some terrible things have been done in the name of religion. But I don't know how you can say organized religion has made a mess of things as if religion was to blame for all the world's ills. In fact I can think of a great many social ills that wouldn't exist if religion had a stronger influence.

All of this talk about bathrooms on starships has brought up another issue that I've thought of but not sure to address. So I'll just say it. I don't think those jump suits would make for convenient bathroom breaks for the female crewmembers - especially if the bathrooms were cramped little spaces.

I notice whenever the crew eats in the mess hall they get up and leave their plates on the table. That just bothers me - shouldn't they carry their tray to a collection bin; now I understand there would be a steward at the Captain's table but in the mess hall?

I've had this thought going round my head ever since I’ve read a couple of topics about gays on Star Trek – I ignored it because I didn’t want to start anything controversial but I just have to ask this. What do you think diversity really means? Does it mean accepting people who have different viewpoints or cultures or is it more a matter of celebrating those of certain viewpoints who have been labeled “diverse” by the powers that be in society.

I noticed a lot of support for representation of homosexuals. As mentioned in some of the other posts there are people who oppose homosexual activity based on their religious beliefs just like they do adultery or many other things. Many politically correct spin masters use the word "hate" instead of disagree to label these people. In truth most religious people I know don't hate people that engage in the various activities they themselves choose not to do. I believe real diversity would show that people can respectfully disagree yet work together and even be supportive of one another.

There are of course religious lunatics that preach hate but they are the exception that everyone likes to treat as the majority. I find it ironic that through the efforts of the faithful many needy people throughout the world receive food, clothing, shelter, comfort, medical attention and supplies, education, disaster relief, etc. Yet, if you watch television, you would think all religious people were mean-spirited morons.

So my question is why has there never been a Star Trek character (human) that was religious? I mean the type of religious person I know - someone who works a normal job but just happens to believe in God, pray, and read scripture. The Star Trek future seems to imply that religions will disappear in the next century or two. I doubt that will happen, statistics show that the more conservative faiths are the ones experiencing the most growth. And while some people think religion and science don’t mix I’ve known many religious scientists. So I’m waiting for Star Trek to be truly bold and truly go where the Hollywood bureaucrats are afraid to go. But I do not believe it will ever happen. But then again I do not believe Star Trek will be truly diverse until it does.

I just rewatched 'Fortunate Son' from first season. When asked about his leaving his family on the Horizon Mayweather responded "they still have my sister and her husband." Did I miss something?