View Single Post
Old August 3 2013, 12:37 AM   #23
Re: Marriage in Nutrek

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
Lt. Cheka Wey wrote: View Post
With young people getting married later ior not at all should these trends be reflected in NuTrek. Have we seen a couple with children that was not married and lived happily together in Trek ever? Should we?
Something like that could be examined in a series format, whether as the focus of one episode or as a story played out across many episodes. But in a movie? No - there's really not going to be enough room to address the subject adequately.

Herkimer Jitty wrote: View Post
Instead of tunnel vision-ing on one type of relationship, why not take the realistic route, which is "different strokes for different folks."

IE, different people do different things differently.
Also this.

Aaand iguana gets his sarcasm detector checked.

serenitytrek1 wrote: View Post
iguana_tonante wrote: View Post

I know trek is fiction however trek has always reflected our society and this society we live in has proven time and time again that it is best for a child to be raised in a household where the father and mother are either married or are in some sort of commitment (domestic partnership) with one another.

Of course there are circumstances (death of a parent , illegitimacy, domestic violence or divorce) when most children would not be able to experience the traditional family structure.

However , when an opportunity is given for a child to have a mother and father as a married or stable couple, I say no child should be denied that.

For the past 3 weeks since the Travyon Martin case , race and the family unit has been a hot topic in America . 73% of African American (AA) kids are born out of wedlock with absent fathers, this scenarios has contributed to why a lot of African American men go down the thug life which only leads to imprisonment, drugs and death.

Of course this is not just for AA, Its for young men in general. A lot of men (not all) with absent fathers tend do worse in life.

So I say Trek should keep the traditional family unit structure.

Relating my personal opinions to the Trek couples, Carol is now on the ship, if David is born in this timeline, Kirk would definitely be there with her to raise him. Chris Pine's Kirk seems to get more mature with every film so I don't see him not be there for his son.

As for Spock/Uhura, Vulcans have always been traditional. In the comics Spock did defined their relationship as a courtship (you an get more traditional than that). So I don't think they would jump into anything.

which to me, is the way it should be in the real world.

Someone commented on JJ and his view on marriage. JJ is married with 3 kids and his leading female character , Sydney Bristow from Alias. got married and had two kids with her husband by the time the last episode aired

So I don't see JJ straying away from that ideology.

Forgive me for ranting but I am just so sick of how most young people of this generation have come to embrace the baby mama and baby daddy nonsense.
serenitytrek1, you seriously need to start putting your rant posts in your blog and stop dumping them indiscriminately into threads here. A good half of that had nothing whatsoever to do with the topic question raised by the OP. Having opinions about stuff is one thing, but please try to keep your focus on what's being discussed and save the off-topic material for another discussion in which it's actually relevant.

First of all, let me say that I am a bit offended by your post and I say this with respect to you.

I fail to understand how my post was not relevant. Trek was a series that dealt with real human issues, I was only referencing the state of marriage and children in our society and how it should affect trek.

so how can that not be relevant to the topic?

the question asked was if couples in new trek should get married before they have kids and weather it should even matter in this current age and I said YES by backing up my opinions with the importance of marriage in the real world we live in.

So (again) how is my post not relevant to the question?

The issue on this thread is about marriage in nu trek and I am looking at marriage from a real human perspective..what trek is originally about in the first place.

Trek was always about human philosophies. Trek was a series that dealt with real social issues like racism, politics, power, marriage, friendship, family...the list goes on.

This is what made Trek unique form other franchises.

With due respect , you saying my comment is not relevant is like a person reviewing the Deep Space 9 episode (Far Beyond the Stars) where Captain Sisko leaved in the 1940'a as a writer and had to face a lot of racism because no one wanted to publish his work in academia .

Most people that have reviewed or commented on that episode to an extent has always referenced the racial history of America. In fact that episode would not have existed in the first place if America did have a long and complex history on race.

I am no different, I am stating my opinion on this topic based on society long standing history of what marriage is and am applying it to romantic relationships in Trek.

You say my post is not relevant yet you see to have forgotten that the first interracial kiss happened on trek when the civil rights movement was going on.

coincidence much????

I guess the civil right movement in the 60's was not relevant and was not a contributing factor to why Trek had the first interracial kiss.

I doubt Gene Rodenberry would agree.

maybe I said to much but I had too. marriage and children are complex issues. even Vulcans know that.
serenitytrek1 is offline   Reply With Quote