Star Trek Beyond - Farewell to a Franchise

  • Thread starter Thread starter pnewton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rose71 said:
I read an interview with George Takei and he made a very sensible and fundamental point. he said that Gene Rodenberry had not intended Mr. Sulu to be gay, so there is no justification for suddenly making him gay.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we are WAY off from Rodenberry’s original vision in many ways. Have been since about the third season of TOS. And so much the better. Some of his ideas were…beyond meh.
 
Thorolfr said:
It’s not a solvable problem yet. But in the future…?

time.com/3748019/same-sex-couples-biological-children/
Click to expand...
At least in the case of homosexual men, even if they would be both biologically related to the child, a woman would still have to carry that child. What about the biological attachments that the mother has to the child? Doesn’t the child deserve to know who their mother is? How often do surrogates stay in touch with child they created? And even if they do stay in touch, it’s not the same as having a Mother in the home. To purposely create a situation where a child is born and purposely detached from their mother, even in the situation where a surrogate approves of this arrangement, is awful. I feel a great deal of sympathy with the children born from surrogates and who are in a situation where they have no contact with their mother. I know that heterosexual couples go through surrogacy as well, and this is also ethically concerning and should be stopped.

Even in the case of a lesbian couple, they have to go through all this process to try and have sperm created, whereas most heterosexual couples can have children naturally. They don’t need a process to create sperm or eggs and go through all of that to create a child. And even if the scenario in your article works, I wonder what the long term impact on the health of a child created from such a manner would be. The idea that a child would have no biological father whatsoever, is surreal.
 
_Abyssinia said:
And even if the scenario in your article works, I wonder what the long term impact on the health of a child created from such a manner would be. The idea that a child would have no biological father whatsoever, is surreal.
Click to expand...
The scenario in the article is one where a child would have two biological fathers but no biological mother. That would really be a case of “boldly going where no man has gone before”. 😉
 
Thorolfr said:
The scenario in the article is one where a child would have two biological fathers but no biological mother. That would really be a case of “boldly going where no man has gone before”. 😉
Click to expand...
But how would that be that possible? That child would have to be carried by a woman? How could she have no biological relation to the child?
 
Thorolfr said:
The scenario in the article is one where a child would have two biological fathers but no biological mother. That would really be a case of “boldly going where no man has gone before”. 😉
Click to expand...
Oops I was confused, this must relate then to gestational surrogacy regarding the case that would invoke a male homosexual couple.

According to this person, the technology could be used for cloning humans: ipscell.com/2015/03/babysamesexcouple/

It’s also worth pointing out, that having a mother and father, is not just about biological connection. Many children who have been adopted and have an adopted mother and father could attest to that.

Having a Mother and Father can provide different things to a child, and two fathers or two mothers, even in a scenario where two men or two women could be biologically related to the child, can’t provide that complementary balance to a child.
 
meltzerboy said:
And, insofar as going to the movies is concerned, the cost of a ticket is now up to $17.50. Incredible!
Click to expand...
Depends where you live. Here, you can see a first-run film, and enjoy popcorn and an Icee, for less than $25; however, we are somewhat of a poor town, so price levels are relatively suppressed.

ICXC NIKA
 
Thorolfr said:
The scenario in the article is one where a child would have two biological fathers but no biological mother. That would really be a case of “boldly going where no man has gone before”. 😉
Click to expand...
According to the original show, wasn’t the mission of the Starship Enterprise supposed to be only five years? What is this: Afghanistan?
 
Thorolfr said:
The scenario in the article is one where a child would have two biological fathers but no biological mother. That would really be a case of “boldly going where no man has gone before”. 😉
Click to expand...
How is that even possible? I’ve heard the reverse, where the baby girl would have two moms and no dad, combining the DNA in both eggcells; but how do you have biological parenthood at all without a woman?

ICXC NIKA
 
GEddie said:
How is that even possible? I’ve heard the reverse, where the baby girl would have two moms and no dad, combining the DNA in both eggcells; but how do you have biological parenthood at all without a woman?

ICXC NIKA
Click to expand...
As the article says:
If scientists can figure out how to turn a primordial germ cell that originated from the skin of a man into an egg, could it be fertilized with his partner’s sperm?
Click to expand...
A woman would then have to act as a surrogate to carry the fertilized egg created from two men. But the surrogate would not be biologically related to the child.
 
meltzerboy said:
According to the original show, wasn’t the mission of the Starship Enterprise supposed to be only five years? What is this: Afghanistan?
Click to expand...
It did last 5 years. Subsequent missions have lasted longer.
 
Yep and she went on serving. It was implied that Kirk led another 5 year mission after the major refit we saw the tail end of in Star Trek the Motion Picture (which in universe occurred in 2270). And she served almost 40 years by the time Kirk blows her up in Star Trek III (which occurred in universe in 2285).
 
Luigi_Daniele said:
Me, either.

Besides, homosexuality was cured in the 23rd century.
Click to expand...
Where do you get that from? There is the idea that in the future in a Star Trek sense or even maybe a a real world sense that homosexual behaviour / same-sex relationships / same-sex marriage would be more accepted… well what if science and technology got to such a level that homosexuality as a sexual identity could actually be diagnosed and cured?
 
_Abyssinia said:
Where do you get that from? There is the idea that in the future in a Star Trek sense or even maybe a a real world sense that homosexual behaviour / same-sex relationships / same-sex marriage would be more accepted… well what if science and technology got to such a level that homosexuality as a sexual identity could actually be diagnosed and cured?
Click to expand...
If that future universe believes in Darwin’s theory of evolution, which includes the idea that reproduction is a hallmark of success, then homosexuality would certainly be considered a less than ideal condition, requiring medical treatment.
 
jmcrae said:
If that future universe believes in Darwin’s theory of evolution, which includes the idea that reproduction is a hallmark of success, then homosexuality would certainly be considered a less than ideal condition, requiring medical treatment.
Click to expand...
Except that in some alternative sexualities, there is indeed reproduction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top