Vanguard controversy

[JD]

Let me just start out by saying, that I know everyone is entitled to there opinion, and I am not trying to say that mine is better or worse than anyone else's. But it's starting to kinda get on my nerves that every time somebody mentions this book the same debate starts back up. I understand that some people mignt not like some of the stuff in it, but I don't see where any of it is really that much worse than the stuff that you see on primetime TV today. As for Pennington, I don't think that they were trying to promote adulty, it was simply one of the things that led to his downfall later in the book. So if anything I think it was showing how bad adultry is.

I'm sorry but I wanted to get this off my chest without derailing a thread, so if you mods want to imediately lock this thread to keep thing under control feel free.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

You're entitled to your opinion as we all are. We should each be allowed to voice it. Because some believe some things to be completely immoral and you may not, doesn't mean either opinion should be stifled.

I returned the remaining books to Borders after reading the disturbing portions of Harbinger. If it doesn't bother you, no problem.

 

[Trent Roman]

The problem is not opinion. The problem is facts, whether a blantant disregard for or total lack of them, and the gross human rights violations that ensue.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Maestro]

I definately need to read these books now to see what the fuss is about.

Just because fiction includes adultery doesn't mean that it's promoting it. If the author's message is that adultery is bad, then this book is fine. If the author's message is that cheating on your wife is a good thing, then there's a problem.

Sometimes, morally clinging groups struggle with seeing the difference.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I think that the "disturbing" stuff was the hot Vulcan/Klingon lesbian stuff.

As for the adultery, Pennington is a flawed, imperfect human being, just like the rest of us. He made mistakes and is now trying to atone for them. Good for him. Anybody should be allowed a chance at redemption.

 

[foravalon]

Wait, where is there controversy going on regarding Vanguard, and what controversy?

TheLonelySquire said:
I returned the remaining books to Borders after reading the disturbing portions of Harbinger. If it doesn't bother you, no problem.

Which parts of the book were disturbing? Where all of the colonists and the crew of an entire starship are slaughtered with out warning and the truth is subsequently covered up by the UFP for diplomatic reasons? I suppose that's controversial given the Federation's honest sunny happy front they put forth to prospective new members and the like, but a very similar deception was also carried out "for the greater good" of the Federation in Serpent Among the Ruins.

 

[Scott Pearson]

TheLonelySquire said:
"Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."—1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Sounds like the kingdom of God is going to have a lot of spare rooms. Gene Roddenberry and George Takei are right out, that's for certain. So I guess I'll get to meet them sooner or later . . .

 

[Geoff]

TheLonelySquire said:
Because some believe some things to be completely immoral and you may not, doesn't mean either opinion should be stifled.

So because I enjoy the Vanguard series, it follows that I think adultery is just peachy-keen?

Funny. I've been faithfully married for eighteen years, and the thought of cheating on my wife has never crossed my mind. I guess I'd better stop reading the books for fear that all of my moral values will come crashing down around my ankles.

Unless, of course, I'm one of those rare people who can read about flawed characters without wanting to emulate them.

 

[Maestro]

Turtletrekker said:
I think that the "disturbing" stuff was the hot Vulcan/Klingon lesbian stuff.

Well, that just sounds cool.

 

[Scott Pearson]

Geoff said:Unless, of course, I'm one of those rare people who can read about flawed characters without wanting to emulate them.

I always want to emulate flawed characters. After I read some Shakespeare, I got into some pretty deep shit.

 

[Cicero]

TheLonelySquire said:
"Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."—1 Corinthians 6:9-10

I'm fairly sure that reads more accurately:

"Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

 

[Turtletrekker]

^Well, there goes the whole human race...

 

[foravalon]

Scott Pearson said:

TheLonelySquire said:
"Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."—1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Sounds like...

"fornicators" Wouldn't that mean that every book or episode with a Kirk hook-up in it is morally objectionable and not appropriate to condone, watch, or read as well? And thus the entirety of the original series for that matter? Has TheLonelySquire returned all of this material too?

WWJD?

I do find it disturbing to live in a time and place when girls kissing girls could possibly be construed as more disturbing than murder, lies, and genocide. But that's just the faithful in me.

 

[Maestro]

Cicero said:

TheLonelySquire said:
"Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."—1 Corinthians 6:9-10

I'm fairly sure that reads more accurately:

"Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Cicero, your quote is consistent with my copy of the Bible. However, I should point out that both quotes are taken out of context. There is more to this portion of St. Paul's letter than what is being quoted here.

 

[Broccoli]

Turtletrekker said:
I think that the "disturbing" stuff was the hot Vulcan/Klingon lesbian stuff.

What, what, what, what?!

So many questions...off to the library.

 

[Turbo]

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (NIV):

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And this is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

The third part of this verse (11), which TheLonelySquire has so conveniently left off, is that part that matters. Many of the Corinthians have sought, and been granted, forgiveness for their sins.

And in Vanguard, Pennington is trying to make up for his mistakes; he's seeking forgiveness. Is a story with someone seeking forgiveness for his sins too controversial and disturbing to read? If so, I suggest you return your copy of the Bible to Borders as well.

 

[Cicero]

Maestro said:

Cicero said:

TheLonelySquire said:
"Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God."—1 Corinthians 6:9-10

I'm fairly sure that reads more accurately:

"Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Cicero, your quote is consistent with my copy of the Bible. However, I should point out that both quotes are taken out of context. There is more to this portion of St. Paul's letter than what is being quoted here.

I've never before read Corinthians (nor, indeed, more than spare passages of the Bible), but the surrounding context seems to indicate that the meaning of this section is not far off from how it appears.

 

[Maestro]

Actually, the passage is telling the Corinthians that if they cannot handle minor squabbles within their community, they are not fit to spread the good news of Christ's judgement throughout the world. According to Paul, the unbelievers that he lists in 9-10 will not get into Heaven, but those who are washed in Christ Jesus need to be able to handle their own issues before they can deal with the unbelievers.

 

[Cicero]

^ To and including expelling persons from their midst who sin in those ways. The forgiveness aspect is relevant to this discussion, but appears to carry an implication that the sinful behavior of the forgiven lies in the past.

Out of curiosity, would any of this apply to Pennington if he isn't Christian?

 

[Turbo]

I'm not trying to apply Christianity to Pennington.

I'm trying to apply a parallel using TheLonelySquire's frame of reference.