Poll If the Q put this version of humanity on trial for being a grievously savage race

Perhaps a background of the Q and any conflicts that they had with each other might lead to an outcome of "other".

 

Are we ignoring that another human jammed a starship up the space whale's ass, which our heroic Discovery crew never removed? Okay, I guess we are.

 

They gave it some ex-lax and a long magazine, some things take care of themselves. It isn’t going to be happy though.

 

Nope. That's why I said "general non-grievousness".

 

Better than a colonoscopy.

 

Muggle problems.

 

It was an act of compassion on Burnham, Tilly, and Stamet's parts from as soon as they learned the creature was sentient/sapient and suffering, and (eventually) on Saru's part as well. Stamets risked his life for it, Tilly her career, and Burnham risked her life (by testing its sapience in not attacking her) and her only chance at some semblance of redemption with Starfleet to do the right thing.

When they discovered that Mudd's ship was inside the Gormagander's stomach they had a very limited timetable to prevent Mudd from blowing up the ship again or turning it over to the Klingons, space-whale included (the Klingons would probably kill it), so the priority would not have been removing a ship which while uncomfortable, was clearly not immediately life threatening to the creature.

Given that they went out of their way during time of war (even the normally warhawk-ey Lorca) to rescue an endangered species and transport it to somewhere it could be treated and breed in safety, why would there be any doubt that they would remove Mudd's ship from the creature's stomach as soon as the immediate threat to Discovery was neutralized?

Also, are the crew qualified or equipped to perform the necessary surgery or transporter operation to safely remove the ship from the space-whale? What if they end up damaging it more in the process due to unfamiliarity with its physiology? Perhaps the better option is to leave the ship be until qualified veterinarians... IN SPAAAAAAACE!!! can handle the problem without harming the creature further.

 

I'm intensely depressed that you beat me to it.

 

Q: Picard never flipped me off!
LORCA: He should stick to wine and leave fighting Klingons to the professionals.

 

Burnham coached them all into doing it. But she is not a prime example of what humanity has become since she was raised on vulcan. Stamets committed an illegal act to spare the creature which proves what? That they will compromise their ethics to save them from compromising their ethics?

They said in the episode that needed to the help the creature or else Lorca would be court-martialed but Lorca did not seem concerned with the creatures well being. Saru and Burnham were the ones that pushed to help the creature. Burnham who was raised by Vulcans and Saru the non-human.

 

Q judging humanity was always a stupid and ill thought out idea. Did the writers forget that the Federation and Starfleet are multi-species organizations? How could they "exile" humanity without impacting the entire Federation?

 

I love how you just randomly included Robeau kicking ass. Because of course Robeau would kick ass.

(*Robeau fans of the world unite )

 

I think the TNG relaunch novels retconned it so that Q was just testing Picard specifically and that it was never his intention to actually punish them or anything.

 

Stalking taken to the cosmic level.

 

The whole Q storyline was something of an afterthought when they had to beef Encounter at Farpoint up to a two hour telemovie.

 

Which is probably why it pretty much sucks.

 

And yet, still arguably the more interesting storyline in Farpoint. Interpret that how you will.

 

Low bar.

 

Considering that Q levered this accusation against humanity as a whole but NOT against the Klingons -- despite the fact that Worf was literally standing right next to them the entire time -- it's pretty obvious that Q was just trolling Picard and the "trial" was just his way of being an ass. Q pretty much admits this at the end of Farpoint:

PICARD: Why do you use other lifeforms for recreation?
Q: If so, you've not provided the best...​

Truth is, Q only went after Picard because of his sense of self-righteousness and his personal pride at what humanity had accomplished in its long hard evolution. Try this same crap with Lorca and the results would be very different:

Q: Actually, the issue at stake is patriotism. You must return to your world and put an end to the commies. All it takes is a few good men.
LORCA: What commies? We fuckin WON that war, my friend. Hell, we won it twice. Nuked half a continent to get rid of them. My great grandad pushed the button.
Q: But you can't deny that you're still a dangerous, savage child race.
LORCA: Eh... <Shrugs> We have our moments. Seems to me we're making progress.
Q: Oh yeah? You want to review your progress?
(Flash, and a change into a padded suit)
Q: Rapid progress, to where humans learned to control their military with drugs.
LORCA: Uh... yeah... half a continent, remember? Those are the guys who lost.
Q: (annoyed, taking a snort of something) Oh, sure. But later, on finally reaching deep space, humans of course found enemies to fight out there too. And to broaden those struggles you again found allies for still more murdering. The same old story, all over again.
LORCA: Yeah? What's your alternative, then? Mothball all our starships and let the Klingons and the Breen and god knows who else rape and pillage at will? Look, I get it, we don't always do the right thing or even the just thing. We do what we can to preserve life and seek the best outcome possible. Not everyone wants to cooperate with us, and not everyone's interested in peace. Fuck those guys, that's why phasers were invented.
Q: <Sigh> This is no fun... Alright, back to my original idea. I'm gonna transport you back to the South in 1855 and you have to convince Jeffeson Davis to have sex with Michael Burnham or I'll murder your entire crew. Good luck! <Flash>​

 

I was not addressing the broader premise of your thread but rather responding to the specific issues raised in the two posts I quoted, so you're arguing a different point than the ones I was replying to.