RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,052
Posts: 5,431,196
Members: 24,926
Currently online: 648
Newest member: In_Correct

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Burton To Be Honored at Facets Boo! Bash
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

New Trek Puzzles
By: T'Bonz on Oct 15

Star Trek Online: Delta Rising
By: T'Bonz on Oct 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Deep Space Nine

Deep Space Nine What We Left Behind, we will always have here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 14 2010, 05:16 PM   #31
DevilEyes
Rear Admiral
 
DevilEyes's Avatar
 
Location: basking in the warmth of the Fire Caves
View DevilEyes's Twitter Profile
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

SpyOne wrote: View Post
darkwing_duck1 wrote: View Post
It was Bajoran faith that saw them through the Occupation and the Dominion War.
Ro Laren would disagree.
For some (probably many) Bajorans, faith in the Prophets helped them not lose hope during the Occupation. That doesn't mean that anyone who was not religious was going to be depressed, hopeless, suicidal or unable to survive. People are different and find strength and hope in various ways. It would be pretty silly to claim that everyone needs religion in their lives or that nobody could possibly derive hope, peace or ethical principles without it, just as it would be silly to deny that it is beneficial to some people.

It is also silly to claim that Bajoran religion is inherently associated with, say, slow development of technology, or a caste system - without evidence that there is any causal link there.
__________________
Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

my Buffy/Angel rewatch
DevilEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2010, 05:16 PM   #32
SpyOne
Commander
 
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
Navaros wrote: View Post
Worf murdered an unarmed Weyoun,
Weyoun had it coming. If you don't want to get attacked by a Klingon, don't capture him, don't torture him, don't threaten him with execution, and don't insult his "girlfriend" in front of her. And you could in fact argue that Worf was defending Ezri's honour by killing Weyoun. Under these conditions it's fair game. Weyoun was the one challenging Worf. I don't see anything dishonourable here.
I agree. I think the Klingons recognize that what Weyoun did was enough to provoke an attack (any of the things he did), and thus his being unarmed when the attack came was his fault and not Worf's responsibility.

And even if he broke some rule by challenging Gowron... there's a difference between following the rules and being honourable. Some of the most dishonourable Klingons were always following the "rules". I guess Gowron wasn't breaking any rules when he dishonoured Worf and his family again in "The Way of the Warrior". But it still wasn't a very honourable thing to do.
It does not appear that Worf broke any rules there. Although it was more Martok's place to do it than Worf's, Klingon society seems to believe that if the leader is a traitor or a coward, ANY subordinate has the right to challenge him.

For my money, though, Worf misunderstood the quote from Kahless: "Great men do not seek power, they have power thrust upon them". That means that, even though Worf did not do what he did because he wanted to be Chancellor, nevertheless the power is his. Because he was the one willing to put his life on the line to stop what he knew was wrong.
And it builds so beautifully with Ezri's earlier comment about "Who was the last Chancellor you respected?"
Worf.
They should have made him keep it.
SpyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2010, 08:16 PM   #33
John200
Lieutenant Commander
 
John200's Avatar
 
Location: New Brunswick Canada
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

She was so right.

The Klingons are for the most part full of crap ,but fun to have around
John200 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14 2010, 08:19 PM   #34
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
The Klingons are definitely hypocrites, but no more so than the Federation.

The Klingons talk a big game about honor, but then constantly act dishonorably.

The Federation talks a big game about understanding and acceptance, but then constantly judges others by UFP standards.
That's because the Federation actually follows its moral code.
The alternative is not applying this moral code when it comes to others - aka betraying its morals. The prime directive streches the limit of its morality as it is.
If its moral code is to accept others' ways and beliefs, how is it following that code to impose someone else's ways and beliefs on others and expect them to follow UFP, or more often Earth, standards? Being accepting of others means you can't expect them to be just like you.
Is it moral to accept other's ways?

Your human morals forbid the taking of lives of innocents under any circumstances.
Let's say you meet a culture where such crimes are acceptable.
Let's say you walk down a street and you see one member of this culture murdering in cold blood another person, who fights to stay alive.

If you don't interfere to save this person, you're blatantly breaching your own moral code in the name of moral relativity.
But what if the person being murdered is a human, like you? Do you let the criminal murder this human, because that's acceptable for him and you must respect this?
What if you are the one being killed? Do you let the murderer kill you because he's acting in accordance to his morals? How far does your moral relativity go?

You see, beyond a point, not judging others by your morals betrays the very fundamentals of your morals!
Even if your morals include acceptance of others, this precept cannot be absolute without making a mockery of YOUR OWN morals and beliefs - they can just as well not exist at all.

As for the Federation, the Prime Directive pushes its morality to its limits, in the name of moral relativity - of not imposing one's morals on others.

Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
Shran--you pretty much summed it up as far as I'm concerned.
Envy is NOT a desirable trait, Nerys Ghemor.
I don't know where you're pulling this "envy" stuff from, but as I believe I have made abundantly clear before, I do not envy the Federation...I am suspicious of it and would not want to live there. Were I in the Trekiverse, I would emigrate AWAY from it. A non-Federation colony, populated by people from species that are IN the Federation...that might work. But a Federation member world...I don't want anything to do with it.
Where do I get this 'envy' stuff from:
Your posts towards trekverse humans/the Federation have been consistently resentful, full af agressivity.

And yet, your stated reasons for this have been all over the place: conspiracy theories that, after the third world war, humans have exterminated all opposing viewpoints in order to create their society; humans don't interfere enough and are hypocrites; humans interfere too much and are hypocrites; humans are naive and arrogant (I find that quite ironic, considering that cardassians are your favourite species), etc.

Your resentment towards trekverse humans has no logical basis, it's textbook envy; if I were to speculate, I would say it exists because you identified with the cardassians and the Federation won one too many times the 'games' played with the Cardassian Union.

Last edited by ProtoAvatar; April 15 2010 at 10:49 AM.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15 2010, 02:42 AM   #35
Nerys Ghemor
Vice Admiral
 
Nerys Ghemor's Avatar
 
Location: Cardăsa Terăm--Nerys Ghemor
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

DevilEyes wrote: View Post
I'd say that the area where the Cardassian society is very hypocritical/contradictory is their "family values". They say that the family is very important to them, but apparently it means that everyone must have a perfect biological nuclear family, while orphans have no rights and the society makes no effort to take care of them, and children born out of wedlock are seen as a disgrace and should be murdered.
I would say that to them, it isn't hypocrisy since everything has to submit to the law of the Cardassian state--and I suspect adultery is illegal if you get caught. Also, the Cardassian state has no tolerance for anything it sees as a "burden," and I think they see orphans as burdens upon society.

Of course, I do not agree with or endorse said view. I find it repugnant. But I believe that in the "orthodox" Cardassian mindset, there is no contradiction because the family, as highly valued as it is, is subordinated to the state.

ProtoAvatar--I am not even going to dignify your ranting and ridiculously incorrect assertions about my character with any more of a response than to say that I think that however much the Cardassians have screwed up (and they have, royally), they at least have a chance to improve because they got hit upside the head hard enough, because they lost one too many times. As for the rest, I believe there's more than sufficient evidence. And I would suggest that you avoid the personal remarks towards me--I'm not going to ask again.
__________________
Are you a Cardassian fan, citizen? Prove your loyalty--check out my fanfic universe, Star Trek: Sigils and Unions. Or keep the faith on my AU Cardassia, Sigils and Unions: Catacombs of Oralius!
Nerys Ghemor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15 2010, 07:56 AM   #36
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar--I am not even going to dignify your ranting and ridiculously incorrect assertions about my character with any more of a response than to say that I think that however much the Cardassians have screwed up (and they have, royally), they at least have a chance to improve because they got hit upside the head hard enough, because they lost one too many times. As for the rest, I believe there's more than sufficient evidence. And I would suggest that you avoid the personal remarks towards me--I'm not going to ask again.
Nerys Ghemor, I was merely responding to your post - you ASKED me to comment about you. If you know you won't like the answers, don't ask the questions.

Also - I wasn't discussing the cardassians in my previous post - I was discussing your attitude towards the trekverse humans.
And that post follows logic aka it is NOT a rant. Feel free to point out where my analysis is incorect.

Last edited by ProtoAvatar; April 15 2010 at 08:15 AM.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15 2010, 03:03 PM   #37
DevilEyes
Rear Admiral
 
DevilEyes's Avatar
 
Location: basking in the warmth of the Fire Caves
View DevilEyes's Twitter Profile
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
DevilEyes wrote: View Post
I'd say that the area where the Cardassian society is very hypocritical/contradictory is their "family values". They say that the family is very important to them, but apparently it means that everyone must have a perfect biological nuclear family, while orphans have no rights and the society makes no effort to take care of them, and children born out of wedlock are seen as a disgrace and should be murdered.
I would say that to them, it isn't hypocrisy since everything has to submit to the law of the Cardassian state--and I suspect adultery is illegal if you get caught. Also, the Cardassian state has no tolerance for anything it sees as a "burden," and I think they see orphans as burdens upon society.

Of course, I do not agree with or endorse said view. I find it repugnant. But I believe that in the "orthodox" Cardassian mindset, there is no contradiction because the family, as highly valued as it is, is subordinated to the state.
I'm pretty sure that it was widely known that Dukat and many other Cardassians were having Bajoran mistresses. It was OK to do it as long as you don't talk publicly about it. But it is only an issue when there's a child involved, and when he decided to actually acknowledge that child? That's hypocrisy.

And what about orphans? Their parents didn't do anything illegal or shameful. They just died or got themselves killed, perhaps in the service of the state, and then after their death, their children end up on the street and the state doesn't care. And I fail to see how this is a good thing for the state and the society. Is it an incentive for people to fight for the state? Hell no. How is it good for any society to have people living in poverty and starving? Maybe some of those children would go on to become great scientists or war heroes. As Vulcans would say, there is no logic in that.

Besides, you'd expect that in a society that values family, it would extend to relatives other than the nuclear family. Yet apparently, while it is a shame to abandon one's (legal) child, uncles, aunts and other relatives are not required to take care of their relatives' orphaned children? All those orphans we saw on Bajor must have had some relatives somewhere on Cardassia, I doubt that all their relatives, including the distant relatives, were dead.
__________________
Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

my Buffy/Angel rewatch
DevilEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2010, 03:13 AM   #38
Nerys Ghemor
Vice Admiral
 
Nerys Ghemor's Avatar
 
Location: Cardăsa Terăm--Nerys Ghemor
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

The part with the mistresses--yep, that would be hypocrisy, which comes from an attitude from those in power that they think they're above the system.

The other part...I do think the Cardassians see it as "consistent" by their values, but obviously it is not from an outside standpoint. I would also add that I do not believe we've seen any proof that other relatives aren't required to take in children when the parents died. The trouble may instead come in when relatives are ruled unfit, or do not exist. In those cases I suspect the state does not want to spend resources on those children, and while I agree with your point for what is TRULY right (that those children could easily go on to do something right), my point is that within the Cardassian system it is consistent with the state-ueber-alles mentality, up to and including the idea that some people should die or get by on a bare minimum for the good of the rest.

Again...do I agree with that sort of decision? Do I want to see that for real? HELL no. Do I think it is consistent from an OBJECTIVE moral standpoint? No. (And do I think all Cardassians buy into the idea? No.) But from the Cardassian state's standpoint, it is.
__________________
Are you a Cardassian fan, citizen? Prove your loyalty--check out my fanfic universe, Star Trek: Sigils and Unions. Or keep the faith on my AU Cardassia, Sigils and Unions: Catacombs of Oralius!
Nerys Ghemor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2010, 04:12 AM   #39
RandyS
Vice Admiral
 
RandyS's Avatar
 
Location: Randyland
View RandyS's Twitter Profile
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
The Klingons are definitely hypocrites, but no more so than the Federation.

The Klingons talk a big game about honor, but then constantly act dishonorably.

The Federation talks a big game about understanding and acceptance, but then constantly judges others by UFP standards.
This is pretty much what I was going to say.
RandyS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 16 2010, 08:31 PM   #40
Photon
Commodore
 
Photon's Avatar
 
Location: Dixie
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Navaros wrote: View Post
Worf doesn't live up to his ideals, he's a hypocrite just like all the rest. Worf murdered an unarmed Weyoun, and also challenged Gowron to a duel even though according to Klingon rules he was only allowed to challenge Martok.
I'd kill him in a heartbeat too. He's the freakin' enemy. I just wish that Worf had been more brutal
Photon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 17 2010, 09:15 PM   #41
Temis the Vorta
Fleet Admiral
 
Temis the Vorta's Avatar
 
Location: Tatoinne
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Klingons are to honor as Americans are to freedom.
Temis the Vorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2010, 03:03 PM   #42
Supreme Dittodrone
Vice Admiral
 
Supreme Dittodrone's Avatar
 
Location: Rush Limborg is regenerating on The EIB Network
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Admiral Shran wrote: View Post
The Klingons are definitely hypocrites, but no more so than the Federation.

The Klingons talk a big game about honor, but then constantly act dishonorably.

The Federation talks a big game about understanding and acceptance, but then constantly judges others by UFP standards.
That's because the Federation actually follows its moral code.
The alternative is not applying this moral code when it comes to others - aka betraying its morals. The prime directive streches the limit of its morality as it is.
If its moral code is to accept others' ways and beliefs, how is it following that code to impose someone else's ways and beliefs on others and expect them to follow UFP, or more often Earth, standards? Being accepting of others means you can't expect them to be just like you.

Also, while I think Ezri was spot on about the hypocrisy of the Klingons, I think she was wrong about one thing. She asks Worf if there has ever been a single Klingon Chancellor worthy of respect. I'd say there was at least one - Gorkon.
Technically, she asked Worf "Who was the last leader of the High Council that you respected?" Worf wasn't even alive during Gorkon's time....

ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar--I am not even going to dignify your ranting and ridiculously incorrect assertions about my character with any more of a response than to say that I think that however much the Cardassians have screwed up (and they have, royally), they at least have a chance to improve because they got hit upside the head hard enough, because they lost one too many times. As for the rest, I believe there's more than sufficient evidence. And I would suggest that you avoid the personal remarks towards me--I'm not going to ask again.
Nerys Ghemor, I was merely responding to your post - you ASKED me to comment about you. If you know you won't like the answers, don't ask the questions.

Also - I wasn't discussing the cardassians in my previous post - I was discussing your attitude towards the trekverse humans.
And that post follows logic aka it is NOT a rant. Feel free to point out where my analysis is incorect.
How does it follow logic? You look at her constant critiques of Federation society--many of which are, indeed, quite valid--and you automatically chalk it up to envy, because of what you percieve as inconsistancies?

Testify, please:

Where do I get this 'envy' stuff from:
Your posts towards trekverse humans/the Federation have been consistently resentful, full af agressivity.
So? The Federation has done a great deal which, from a certain point of view, is blatantly wrong. Naturally, one following that POV would be resentful.

Next:

And yet, your stated reasons for this have been all over the place: conspiracy theories that, after the third world war, humans have exterminated all opposing viewpoints in order to create their society;
And...? Consider the admittedly awkward attitudes with which humans seem to approach different POVs in Trek.

humans don't interfere enough and are hypocrites; humans interfere too much and are hypocrites;
Now...for those charges, please cite what you mean.

And then, look at the context of her arguments, sir, and I think you will find that this simply points out the contradictions--and therefore, hypocrisy--of Federation foreign policy.

humans are naive and arrogant (I find that quite ironic, considering that cardassians are your favourite species), etc.
Again, this is not a logical statement, simply an opinion on your part. And it contradicts itself. You rebuke a "Cardassian" for having a certain POV about humans--and yet you feel free to hold the same attitude about Cardassians.

Your resentment towards trekverse humans has no logical basis, it's textbook envy;
How so? Envy is hating someone who is more succesful at something than you, or similar feelings to that effect. How does that apply?

if I were to speculate, I would say it exists because you identified with the cardassians and the Federation won one too many times the 'games' played with the Cardassian Union.
Please. She identifies with the Cardassians as an effect, not a cause. And the "game" went on for decades before ending in a draw. The UFP didn't "win".

Trust me...it was a rant.
__________________
"I have been wounded but not yet slain. I shall lie here and bleed awhile. Then I shall rise and fight again."

"Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown."
Supreme Dittodrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2010, 04:00 PM   #43
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
Now...for those charges, please cite what you mean.
Sure - her recent statements from this thread and from the "Seven Deadly Sins Discuss/ Grade" thread from Trek Literature; in general, you can look at practically each statement she made about trekverse humans, though.

Many times, her statements regarding trekverse humans contradicted each other or were supported by no evidence whatsoever, but all shared a common feature - they were denigratory towards trekverse humans.

Please. She identifies with the Cardassians as an effect, not a cause.
And her identifying with the cardassians leads to her resentment towards trekverse humans. Said resentment leads to her grasping at every possible argument to make cardassians look good and trekverse humans bad.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2010, 04:46 PM   #44
Supreme Dittodrone
Vice Admiral
 
Supreme Dittodrone's Avatar
 
Location: Rush Limborg is regenerating on The EIB Network
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
Now...for those charges, please cite what you mean.
Sure - her recent statements from this thread and from the "Seven Deadly Sins Discuss/ Grade" thread from Trek Literature; in general, you can look at practically each statement she made about trekverse humans, though.

Many times, her statements regarding trekverse humans contradicted each other or were supported by no evidence whatsoever, but all shared a common feature - they were denigratory towards trekverse humans.
And those statements are...?

Please. She identifies with the Cardassians as an effect, not a cause.
And her identifying with the cardassians leads to her resentment towards trekverse humans. Said resentment leads to her grasping at every possible argument to make cardassians look good and trekverse humans bad.
And yet you said regarding her alleged opinion on humans:

humans are naive and arrogant (I find that quite ironic, considering that cardassians are your favourite species), etc.
--thus implying your apparent resentment to Cardassians.

Also, why do you think Nerys identifies with Cardassians more than humans? Could it be, as I said, that she has a point as to the...inconsistancies in UFP policy?
__________________
"I have been wounded but not yet slain. I shall lie here and bleed awhile. Then I shall rise and fight again."

"Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown."
Supreme Dittodrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2010, 05:00 PM   #45
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
 
Re: was ezri right in Tacking into the Wind - are Klingons hypocrites?

Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
ProtoAvatar wrote: View Post
Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
Now...for those charges, please cite what you mean.
Sure - her recent statements from this thread and from the "Seven Deadly Sins Discuss/ Grade" thread from Trek Literature; in general, you can look at practically each statement she made about trekverse humans, though.

Many times, her statements regarding trekverse humans contradicted each other or were supported by no evidence whatsoever, but all shared a common feature - they were denigratory towards trekverse humans.
And those statements are...?
Go to the threads I indicated and read them.

You can't even be bothered to do that and are asking me do do your research for you?
Good luck with that one.
ProtoAvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.