Under that interpretation, it is murder any way you slice it.
Question is: kill one or kill trillions?
What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Under that interpretation, it is murder any way you slice it.
Question is: kill one or kill trillions?
Here we go again.
Again it is back to the trolley problem. If you deliberately kill ANYONE, you fail, since that is playing God.
No. Alien is Alien. Star Trek is Star Trek.
I'm not sure what episodes meet that criteria. (You said AND, right?)
Sometimes Star Trek is Aliens. Sometimes it is The Enemy Below.
Yes, a space monster/conspiracy movie, and an enlightened intellectual series.
It's only enlightened when the writers decide it is.
"Intellectual?"
I was referring to TOS seasons 1 and 2 ONLY, ala The Devil in the Dark.
It's my theory that Section 31 was an attempt to keep/cultivate the non-woke Trekkies.
Right - back to the colonizers hunting down the indigenous inhabitant to get
I don't consider myself woke and Section 31, despite my initial interest, didn't keep my interest.
I feel like DS9 had a recurring problem with its villains being so compelling that people started to side with them. The writers had to go out of their way to make it obvious that Gul Dukat was not a good guy, and even with Bashir repeatedly telling everyone who'll listen why Section 31 sucks, people came away thinking 'hmm, they may ruffle some feathers, but they're the ones who keep the Federation safe'.
I dunno, maybe they should've had it flashing up on screen THESE ARE THE VILLAINS just to make sure no one missed it.
I don't think the target audience of Section 31 was Trekkies to begin with.
I don't even want to know.
"PROFIT AND LACE"... to me, the second worst episode of DS9. (Used to be worst, long ago.)
