Riker terminating the clones in "Up the Long Ladder"

[Mojochi]

In the same series we have a doctor being severely punished for destroying something that definitely qualifies as an abomination.

Who's qualifying it as that, besides you and her?

They had just established intelligent contact with the CE. It is clearly a living, intelligent creature, with as much right to its survival as them, which she knowingly & admittedly executes for revenge.

There is no claim of survival for something not alive, regardless of whether it has the capacity to become something alive... He said with the faint echo in his head of the song "Every Sperm is Sacred"

 

[triskelion16]

What I don't get is why they want to save their broken civilization anyway. Stay on that planet and become a baby making machine with this entire group of people they just met or just join the federation, go somewhere that actually has a future, hmm tough choice.

As Sisko said, Earth is paradise, I guess if they had a choice, they'd all choose to live on Earth rather than some rotten colonies, like the one Tasha Yar was born into. So, it must be that they don't have a choice, there are immigration procedures that limit the number of people than can hope to go live on Earth or any other high quality place, even if we're not told about them.

 

[Timo]

Hmm. I would rather argue that for these particular colonists (and many others), Earth is hell, and the only way to escape that is to put some distance in between and sever all ties with it.

By the time of the departure of the Mariposa, Earth has already become paradise in all practical respects, as per Troi in ST:FC. But it is a paradise that is paranoid about genetic manipulation and exceedingly relies on technology. Judging by what we see of the colonists in the episode, one set would wish to escape the former aspect, the other the latter.

If anything, there might be procedures and practices in place to stop people from leaving Earth at will - because Earth feels liable for its children, and often gets into trouble by their rebellious antics and unthinking recklessness.

The fact that basically all the colonies we see are "counterculture" ones can easily be used as an excuse for lack of consistency in "24th century policies and mores". There are such policies and mores - but they vary from planet to planet, and especially so in the outer colonization zone, and not the least because many such colonies were founded (and isolated) long before the birth of the Federation forced at least some compromising and harmonizing of policies and mores.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ithekro]

A lot of the "countculture" colonies found seem to be from the early 22nd century before the formation of the Federation. Even before the launching of the NX-01.

 

[T'Girl]

Abortion is not about the life of the fetus ...

Unless you're the fetus, then the abortion is very much about you.

As Sisko said, Earth is paradise

At least to Sisko's view of what constitutes a "paradise." Would the Bringloidi and the Mariposan see it as such?

I thought the scene, especially its ending, was an effective if dramatized/stylized criticism of the anti-abortion point of view, criticizing the idea that being pro-life ...

Or just the opposite, with the criticism being of the "pro-abortion" point of view.

Neither Riker nor Pulaski's lives were going to be endangered by a pregnancy or delivery, neither was going to have to carry the developing new life. The destruction of the two clones was solely because neither "parent" wanted the clones to exist.

There was no discussion of moving the clones to the ship, or of guarding them in place until they emerged and then moving them.

every "wife" will bear children for many fathers

Under old English common law, the husband was automatic legally the father of all of his wife's children. While it would be a good idea to keep track of sperm donors to plan future genetic diversity, the children's legal father could be the mother's husband.

As long as the wife (or husband) wasn't engaging in sexual activity outside of the marriage, there would be no infidelity, and the marriage would remain monogamous.

but The Child does suggest abortion is okay in the 24c

Worf: "Captain, obviously the pregnancy must be terminated for the safety of the ship and crew."

This might suggestion that abortion is only okay if the child is a actual danger to others.

 

[fonzob1]

Edit: Oops, I meant to make this a poll, but now I can't. Oh well.

You can still add a poll by going to "thread tools."

 

[Timo]

As long as the wife (or husband) wasn't engaging in sexual activity outside of the marriage, there would be no infidelity, and the marriage would remain monogamous.

I just don't know any males who would view the issue like that. Giving birth to the children of others isn't merely the classic definition of female infidelity, it's also an intimate act conducted in the name of "that other man", and more or less excluding the supposed husband from the circle of intimacy.

It's impossible to tell how the colonists would view the issue, of course. We only saw shocked first reactions by leaders who apparently don't have any sort of moral hold over their subjects' ways of life, merely a formal position of power...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[hux]

"Monogamous marriage" in this context is meaningless gobbledigook

Heard this argument before. Doesn't add up. The idea that when Pulaski says "monogamous marriage will not be possible for several generations" she simply means that they will have to produce children naturally with their chosen partners and artificially with various unchosen partners, is a bizarre interpretation of her language

Monogamy is understood by most people to mean "not engaging in sexual activity with others". If a woman gets turkey basted, people don't go around saying she wasn't monogamous. Doesn't happen

She makes herself clear enough to have Danilo start licking his lips and Granger refer to it as repugnant. It is very clear what she is insinuating here.

I just don't know any males who would view the issue like that. Giving birth to the children of others isn't merely the classic definition of female infidelity, it's also an intimate act conducted in the name of "that other man", and more or less excluding the supposed husband from the circle of intimacy

Seriously You don't know any men who think that monogamy is about sex.

 

[Timo]

I've never met a man who'd think fathering was not about sex. (Although whether sex is about fathering is a more contested topic!)

The issue has arisen quite often, for example as regards the childbearing projects of my lesbian friends and acquaintances. The laws about sperm donation are nicely vague here, and basically both the kid and the dad can make choices about whether to adopt a role or not. But the agreement overall is that monomarriages would not survive polybreeding, not in the tightly knit community that would be involved (be it interstellar colonists or a mixed-voice choir).

Proper randomizing, double-blinding and distancing would solve most of the mental-block problems even for the apparent arch-conservatives around here, but that's not a real option for the small group of colonists; it really calls for a pool as big as a nation. (Preferably heated, with bubbles, and with adjoining bar facilities.)

As for the sticky side of Pulaski's proposal here, it's clear that the Bringloidi could have it as carnal as they want, and the Mariposans could go for utter sterility and detachment - they certainly have the technology, or lack thereof, needed. But the whole point is merging and crossbreeding, and the kids will be reminders for both sides that something not to their own liking took place. Much like those clones, if surviving till birth (or whatever the terminology for cloning of this type), would remind Riker and Pulaski of something that happened without them even knowing about it, let alone "suffering" through it.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[IrishNero]

The episode was aired in the spring of 1989.

That's a very good point. Succinct.

 

[suarezguy]

Or just the opposite, with the criticism being of the "pro-abortion" point of view.

Neither Riker nor Pulaski's lives were going to be endangered by a pregnancy or delivery, neither was going to have to carry the developing new life. The destruction of the two clones was solely because neither "parent" wanted the clones to exist.

There was no discussion of moving the clones to the ship, or of guarding them in place until they emerged and then moving them.

The presentation of both sides was definitely bold enough to make the audience uncomfortable but for me it was more jarring and more condemnatory for the colonists to regard Riker and Pulaski as moral monsters after they had lied and stolen, that because they needed the help of the Enterprise crew they had every right to take it and the crew no right to make their own decisions and prevent being used. Granger does suggest that their "right to survive" includes the right to do anything to anyone to do so.

More generally, although termination is atypically extreme I think the distaste with clones and being cloned is pretty standard for Trek, that the treatment of Tom Riker is the exception (and even then Will pretty much wanted him away from him and his ship).

Edit: It's also interesting to consider that Picard killed another sort of duplicate of himself in "Time Squared" although more reluctantly and arguably to save his own life.

 

[IrishNero]

Neither Riker nor Pulaski's lives were going to be endangered by a pregnancy or delivery, neither was going to have to carry the developing new life. The destruction of the two clones was solely because neither "parent" wanted the clones to exist.

I believe this was my very trouble with the issue. This was not an 'abortion' of any kind, but a type of murder. It's one thing to argue whether a mother has the right to choose to carry a baby to term, but no such argument exists in that case. The clones presented no risk to any of the crew. Riker and Pulaski simply didn't want the clones to live.

 

[T'Girl]

it's also an intimate act conducted in the name of "that other man", and more or less excluding the supposed husband from the circle of intimacy

But if we are talking about a turkey baster (artificial insemination) down at the fertility clinic, where is the "intimacy." The only sexual intimacy the mother is experiencing is with her husband (or lover) and in no way the sperm donor. The resulting pregnancies are a matter if the survival of the combined colonies, however the children would be raised in the family home.

I would assume that any woman would be free to decline her own participation in the program with no societial disapprovial in the tinyist (the same would hold for any given male).

As long as the average number of children born was at least three per couple (statistically) the colony would grow, the colony's society might have a rule about no incest pregnancies, beyond that genetic diversity would be a priority.

I can't see there being any restictions on married couple having their own children in addition to children by artificial means.

 

[Makarov]

I wish they did the sequel to this episode where it turns out they accidentally used Wesley Crusher's DNA for all their babies and it's an entire colony of Wesley Crusher clones speaking with an irish accent.

 

[IrishNero]

I wish they did the sequel to this episode where it turns out they accidentally used Wesley Crusher's DNA for all their babies and it's an entire colony of Wesley Crusher clones speaking with an irish accent.

Yes, it would be an immense pleasure to go around shooting at annoying Irish Wesley Crusher clones. Like a duck hunt.

 

[Timo]

But if we are talking about a turkey baster (artificial insemination) down at the fertility clinic, where is the "intimacy."

Ah, you misread a bit - it's not the insemination that's intimate, but the childbirth (which the Mariposans perhaps might "technologize" to remove that aspect, admittedly; but their tech was found lacking in the episode).

I never said "sexual" intimacy, and indeed never drew an association between marriage and sex, or infidelity and sex. That's going way too technical and narrow.

I would assume that any woman would be free to decline her own participation in the program with no societial disapprovial in the tinyist

I wouldn't. These are hardy colonists, departing to distant stars to found a new culture altogether, and all together. They are expected to give their bit to the common cause. If one folds his or her arms and says "I don't feel like building a house, programming a plowing done, or rearing a child", that's automatic pariah status.

As long as the average number of children born was at least three per couple (statistically) the colony would grow

Yes, that should hold even when one doesn't count in terms of couples but full crossbreeding; all the less reason to accept refusals, then. One wonders how fast the colony should grow, though, and indeed why it should grow. The Bringloidi weren't going to super-breed as far as we know, and their colony was quite self-sustainable as was, again as far as we know. They needed nothing from the Mariposans.

The point isn't that the breeding stock of the combined forces is too small, either from the genetic POV or the colony-building POV. The point is that the "five" Mariposans don't want to die out. Mixing their genes sufficiently thoroughly with those of the Bringloidi will do that trick, sort of (it will dilute the "five" out of existence eventually, and they might be obsessed about their genetic identity after all those generations of cloning, but the original Mariposans would have had nothing against that).

It's all for appearances, really: the Bringloidi don't need the Mariposans for anything real (forget "maturity", Brenna can keep them in line; and forget "technology", they did fine without), and the Mariposans only need to have kids with one Bringloidi each in order to be happy about their place in the continuum of life. The "no monogamy" speech is there only to confuse the issue sufficiently that neither side will stop to think too much about their old prejudices and how it would be easy to simply retain them - it's shock treatment against the "posturing and bigotry" that Picard was so frustrated about in that meeting.

Timo Saloniemi