What's your "controversial" Star Trek opinion?

Picard could have ordered Worf to do it, and he would have gladly obeyed.

Also, if everyone is suspicious of the Klingons "in the next neighborhood," it isn't because of their race, but their constant aggression, the threat they pose to Federation citizens. I don't think it's even suspicion, but due vigilance.

It's more the Romulans whom Earthlings are suspicious of. Why are Earthlings suspicious of them? They are always acting suspicious!

Im not sure these things can be simplified to "race relations" The Klingons and Romulans were supposed to be like the Russians, you know, adversaries that are white?

 

Since there are many more hosts than symbionts, that's to be expected.

As for the Worf/Duras duel, I'm wondering if Worf could have simply asked for, oh, an hour's shore leave beforehand.

 

...not sure if this is actually controversial or not, but:

In the Voyager episode "Counterpoint" Janeway displays more chemistry with Kashyk in 45 minutes than she has with Chakotay in all VOY episodes combined, up to this point in the series.

 

The age of consent in the state of Hawaii (as long as the partner isn't more than 5 years older) is 14.

If the majority of Federation member worlds have legal dueling to the death, then it would be unlikely that such dueling would be illegal in the Federation legal structure. Dueling to the death might be codified in Starfleet regulation.

It's not clear exactly what Worf was technically reprimanded for. Leaving the ship without permission perhaps?

 

And that also happens to be one of Kate Mulgrew's favorite episodes. Coincidence, perhaps?

 

Thanks

 

No, it isn't. Not when it's legal.

Murder is always an illegal act. Since Vulcan law explicitly permits the kunat kalifee, and Klingon law allows for Worf killing Duras, then by definition, neither of those things can be murder.

It's like self-defense. If somebody breaks into your house, and you shoot them, you have not committed murder. You killed someone, yes. But you are allowed to kill to defend yourself, your property, or others. Thus, you haven't committed murder. Same story here.

And besides, T'Pau would surely use her considerable clout to make sure that no one who takes part in kunat kalifee (whether or not they are in Starfleet, or even Federation citizens) would ever be prosecuted if they killed someone in the process.

 

Aaaaaahhh...

edit: although I could see a chicken and egg type question here...

 

Worf is also a citizen of the Klingon Empire. A crime was committed against his family, and he took care of it in a legal manner on Klingon soil.

Picard has Worf on being AWOL, nothing else.

 

Even that I'm not too sure of. It's possible the whole thing went down while Worf was off-shift, and therefore he would never technically be AWOL. Picard could get him on something about leaving the ship without authorization I guess.

 

The issue at hand is not what is legal on certain Federation worlds, but what is legal in Starfleet itself. As Picard states. Worf isn't just any Klingon. He's a Starfleet officer with codes of theirs to uphold. I started out by saying that Worf should be booted from Starfleet for it, as it's pretty evident that they don't allow dueling or personal killings of a similar nature as part of their code of conduct. They in fact abhor such things. Picard doesn't even really want to accept it in Code of Honor, but seemingly has his hands tied by being beholden to the Ligonians for a vaccine, enough so at least to humor Lutan by pretending it's legitimately a death match, when he actually intends to use his abilities to prevent such an ending.

They don't condone duel killing in Starfleet, Picard doesn't. Kirk doesn't (even though he stupidly got caught up in one) & even Spock admits he knows he is punishable for it. Therefore it is the same as murder (An illegal killing). Maybe some Federation worlds do allow it, but that is not Starfleet, of which Worf/Spock are sworn officers

Why would we think 2 constitutes a majority? If anything it's a fringe element that is precariously tolerated, much like Sudan's child marriage laws being an uncomfortable subject for the U.N. of which its a member

It's clear what he was dressed down for. The subject at hand was acceptable killing in the Klingon culture, which Picard shoots down as not being compatible with Starfleet codes of conduct, completing his reprimand with a formal one, which we are led to believe is on the same matter. Worf gets off easy by admitting his wrong doing about THAT subject, & because Picard respects & believes him.

While in active duty as a representative of Starfleet, on a mission involving the killed party, gaining access to those Klingon grounds only through his position on a Starfleet vessel, during a mission involving it

If Worf petitioned for a leave of absence, or outright resigned his commission like in Redemption, & took his butt to Qu'onos, & killed Duras there, outside of his role as a Starfleet officer, then yes. Starfleet has nothing to say about it. He did not do that. He left his post to kill somebody

You don't stop being an officer bound by a uniformed code of conduct by simply being off duty. You still represent them, especially if you are serving on their ship at the time

 

That isn't what I was saying. Since the term AWOL means "Absent Without Leave" if Worf did his duel with Duras while he was off-shift, than he wouldn't have been AWOL as BillJ asserted. I might have been nitpicky and pedantic, but that's all. I was not attempting to say "yeah, murdering it totally okay as long as you're off the clock when you do it."

 

I'm sorry. I mistook you, thinking you meant that the only accusation of which to accuse him was being AWOL, & even that doesn't hold up. Now that I reread it. I actually agree with you. He's never really absent to my recollection either, but imho he definitely is in violation of failing to uphold Starfleet codes of conduct, since he is still currently serving them in active duty. I think there's even grounds to say he violated the Prime directive by affecting political change on the Klingon world, just like Picard expressly forbids him to do in Redemption, forcing him to resign

 

Why would Earth's one example of no dueling be the majority, be the norm, for the entire Federation?

 

I never assume Picard only speaks for Earth when he speaks for Starfleet. We've seen countless races in Starfleet, & to my knowledge most of them never mention dueling to the death, & since Picard considers it a core principle to uphold under Starfleet mandate (As do Kirk & Spock, even though they blundered into it) I think it's fair to suggest that Starfleet doesn't allow dueling to the death, & it's likely frowned upon in the Federation. After all, Kurn has been heard admitting that he'd have killed Riker for intruding on his authority, as would be his right in Klingon law to duel over, yet he doesn't, because that's not acceptable protocol aboard a Starfleet vessel

 

Keeping it in-universe, as per the brief: Janeway made the wrong choice.

Given the opportunity of siding with the Borg or the Undine/species 8472, she should've opted for the latter.

 

You know, the more I watch of Voyager, the more I really think Janeway is wrong about so much, so frequently. I've been surprised by it actually, because while I've had instances of considering the other show's captains (before her) to be wrong on occasion, she's the 1st I've thought "Wow this captain is just constantly having to be corrected or overcome some dumb decision" I wish I had more specific examples of what I mean, but I'm still digging through the series, & it's hard to pinpoint

 

Well, here's another Starfleet commanding officer handling a similar situation:

 

I may have to reassess who my favorite captain is...