Jammer's Reviews

Comment Browser

Clear | RSS for this | Bottom

Total Found: 25,229 (Showing 101-125)

Next »« PreviousPage 5 of 1010
Robert - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 3:15pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

The church does not consider gay feelings a life stule our choice. Conspucience is not sinfull. The church views acts as sinfil.

All sexual acts not open to reproduction are a sin according to the bible and sacred tradition.

One still choses to practice homosexual acts or not, just as one choses whether to practice Catholicism or not. You can argue you don`t chose to have homosexual feelings, but you also don`t chose to think the bible is correct you just do. Religious feelings and thoughts aren`t more up to free will then sexual feelings. Both are inffluenced by nature and nurture."

But these thoughts cause children to kill themselves. I don't think I have more to say on the subject so I'll leave us with a Star Trek quote and a prediction.

Some day the church will decide it's ok to be gay and the faithful will pull a switch and suddenly it will be ok to be gay. The same way it was suddenly ok to have female altar servers.

And on that day nobody will think anything was wrong with the fact that they felt differently yesterday. And THAT is frightening as hell to me!

ODO: Major. Come to see Akorem speak?
KIRA: The Emissary's first public appearance? I wouldn't miss it.
ODO: I'm surprised to hear you call him that.
KIRA: Why? Akorem Laan was, is a great man. He's been with the Prophets for over two hundred years, and now they've sent him back to us.
ODO: Yes, but two days ago you believed Captain Sisko was the Emissary.
KIRA: Well, he made it clear he wants to step aside.
ODO: Does that mean he never really was the Emissary?
ODO: But they can't both be.
KIRA: I don't know. What do you want from me, Odo?
ODO: Forgive me, Major, I don't mean to be difficult, but your faith seems to have led you to something of a contradiction.
KIRA: I don't see it as a contradiction.
ODO: I don't understand.
KIRA: That's the thing about faith. If you don't have it, you can't understand it, and if you do, no explanation is necessary.

John Logan - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 2:53pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

Robert@ Discriminatorry thought? Well what is wrong with that? We have freedom of religion. Religion discriminates nearly Always, unless it is relativistic. Religion discriminates against sin, and against what it perceives to be heretical and false. In this sense all religions discriminate against eachother. Protestants can be against anti-Catholic violence and discrimination in public life, yet still not want Catholics to teach in their schools. Jews can think that the Christian religion is incorrect and forbid those who are uncircumcised from teaching in Jewish schools. That would not be the same in any way, as commiting violence against Christians, as refusing them public jobs, positions in goverment or anything else. Many Catholics opposed anti-Semitic Nazi laws, but that didn`t mean they would be oke with Jews teaching in Catholic schools.

How is disagreeing with sexual promiscuety dangerous? The church teaches sex is only allowed when it is within marriage for reproduction. This has been the cionstant teaching of the church fathers. The Didache, Justin Martyr, Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria, Augustine, all of them were against birth control, abortion and homosexual practices.

Jesus indicated marriage is a permanent sacramental Union between one man and one woman.

The church does not stone the adulterer, and we would protect them if others wished to do so, but we ciould not have adulterers teach in our schools.

You are yourself disceiminating against traditionalistic Catholicism, why would that be any more oke? Condemning the church for following the church fathers is also discriminatorry.

The church does not consider gay feelings a life stule our choice. Conspucience is not sinfull. The church views acts as sinfil.

All sexual acts not open to reproduction are a sin according to the bible and sacred tradition.

One still choses to practice homosexual acts or not, just as one choses whether to practice Catholicism or not. You can argue you don`t chose to have homosexual feelings, but you also don`t chose to think the bible is correct you just do. Religious feelings and thoughts aren`t more up to free will then sexual feelings. Both are inffluenced by nature and nurture.

Actually the church indeed disagrees with most wars and the death penalty, but since John Paul II the church has stated one can faithfully disagree with the church on this, as it has not been infallibly defined, many church fathers believed in just war, many Catholic saints did, and whether taking evil lives to save thiose of the innocent is justified, is considered more grey than whether mothers may kill their babies.

Democrats violate infallible teachings that all the church fathers held since the first century. Those in favour of preemptive war do not.

That really ddoesn`t proof religion is harmfull. The church does not refuse communion to those who disagree on non essential debatable matters, it does refuse communion to those who reject infallible dogmas.

I don`t know pick something? If it is an infallible dogma than no, I follow all de fide articles of the church.

I used to disagree on masturbation, but I conquered that sin. I have come to accept that the pope holds the keys.
William B - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 2:46pm (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S1: Captive Pursuit

The first half or so of DS9's first season is, like most ensemble shows' first seasons, structured mostly around character introductory eps; this is O'Brien's. DS9 starts out with some fairly simple motivations for most of its characters to be on the station: Sisko's reasons are a little (deliberately) hard to pin down, but lie at some intersection of duty, "destiny," and emotional scars; Kira is looking out for Bajor's and her people's best interest; Dax is motivated by intellectual curiosity; Bashir by adventure; Odo by justice; Quark for profit; Jake for, uh...fun, I guess. O'Brien doesn't really need to be on Deep Space Nine, on the frontier. He is a family man with a job -- and he likes his job, and is good at it, but he could very well be doing it elsewhere. He's a noncom everyman. So having the first episode featuring First Contact with a Gamma Quadrant species (as opposed to the Wormhole Aliens, who live in the wormhole!) centre around O'Brien's reactions helps get us a fresh perspective: O'Brien's warming to Tosk on a person-to-person basis works so well because O'Brien genuinely doesn't want anything out of the encounter besides the opportunity to do his required job, and his open-hearted nature gradually leads him to find respect for Tosk as a person. It's a refreshing approach, and I like the fact that O'Brien's *not* being a diplomat or an expert in alien biology (except insofar as anyone in Starfleet is likely to be) but a tech man allows for things between him and Tosk to proceed pretty "naturally," without O'Brien pressing but merely being open to what Tosk has to say and offer. He comes across as friendly and open-hearted without pretension, playing the difficult matter of communicating across cultures very cool and low-key, which is exactly the thing that allows Tosk to lower his guard around him in a way that he'd be unlikely to around anyone else. O'Brien's gradual involvement in Tosk's plight, without much ability or desire to see "the bigger picture" of noninterference in the barbaric rituals of the hunters, similarly shows how O'Brien possesses the general goodheartedness and compassion that we expect from humans generally and Starfleet officers in particular, without having the entrenched perspectives the officers have largely been trained with of the broader implications of "open-mindednes" about alien cultures; O'Brien can get it intellectually, but he's not trained for this sort of thing, and sees Tosk the person and can't *not* help him, because for O'Brien, ethics are mostly personal rather than global, which comes up again and again in stories regarding him (c.f., for example, "The Assignment," "Children of Time," "Honour Among Thieves"). In this episode, that's arguably a good thing.

The O'Brien/Tosk friendship was believably and movingly developed. The key turn in the episode is not that Tosk is a hunted being, but that he absolutely sees himself in those terms; Tosk is Tosk, and for him to stop seeing himself as slave-prey to be hunted for sport would require Tosk to completely change everything about himself -- which, even if it were possible, would be a kind of death. O'Brien, entrenched in human values, doesn't want to believe this initially (i.e. when he makes the plea for Tosk to ask for asylum), but he eventually comes to see Tosk's personal preference as worth risking everything for. Okay, O'Brien cannot save Tosk from the slavery of his conditioning, but he can give Tosk the chance to be true Tosk again, and he does so, giving his friend a gift, which may or may not be "right" in the broader sense but which at least gives Tosk what he wants and satisfies the bonds of friendship.

The big problem with this episode is that, for O'Brien's choice to have weight, there has to be *someone* voicing the opposition, for real -- not "you shouldn't break rules!" (though there is that), but that O'Brien, by releasing Tosk, actually caused the death of some of the hunters. That is a big detail which somehow is not mentioned at all. And this goes down to a general systemic problem of the episode. O'Brien is not the natural choice to make first contact with Tosk, because he has no formal training in diplomacy or exobiology (or, again, if he does, it's only to the extent that all Starfleet do, including people like Miles who didn't go to the academy). Sisko sends him to meet Tosk because Tosk responded to O'Brien on the comm -- fine. But then no one is the least bit curious about this new Delta Quadrant species, EXCEPT by having O'Brien report on him. It gets particularly funny in a later scene when essentially people start berating Miles for his contradictory reports about Tosk, with a big implication that he is failing to properly manage the situation, but except for Bashir's quickly (and amusingly) dismissed suggestion that he talk to Tosk because people confide in doctors and Odo's observing Tosk as security guard, no one makes any effort to talk to him; not Sisko, commander of the station and representative of Starfleet, not Dax, scientist, exobiologist (as I think is established) and seeker of the unknown, not Kira, representative of Bajor. O'Brien is left to handle Tosk alone because...why? No one else can be bothered? If O'Brien made mistakes in handling Tosk -- more on that in a sec -- it is hard to argue that it's all O'Brien's fault when it's crazy to put a noncomm with no diplomatic training as the sole point of contact with a new species from 90 thousand light years away.

Anyway, the big turn at the end is that Sisko agrees to send Tosk back with the hunters, because noninterference blah blah blah, and O'Brien releases him, at which point Sisko tells Odo to "take his time" and then chews O'Brien out at the end, then smiles. Now, remember: a bunch of hunters died. Now the implication here is that Sisko knew that O'Brien was "right" in his personal commitment to Tosk, but Sisko had to act, ostensibly on his Starfleet/Prime Directive duty which superseded it. Now, Elliott talks at length above on why this is annoying in and of itself -- that Sisko lets O'Brien get away with his plan, while officially denying any responsibility, as an act of moral cowardice. I mostly agree. But even if we say that it's reasonable for Sisko to maintain the outward requirements of his duty while letting what he believes is the best moral option happen, the episode doesn't question either of these:

1) Is it Sisko's duty to release Tosk to the hunters, like that?
2) Is it the right thing for Tosk to escape?

On point 1, the Prime Directive is by no means clear. The whole point of the hunting game is that the hunters chase Tosk, and Tosk tries to get away. Seemingly, the Federation are more powerful than Tosk's ship *OR* the hunters' ship. Odo arrests Tosk for doing what Tosk does; Tosk broke rules he was unaware of and then thrown in the brig, which neither Tosk nor the hunters seem to have any particular ability to break through. In other words, the Federation/Bajorans already interfered in a significant way in the hunt; they repaired Tosk's ship AND locked him up. Maybe it reflects badly on Tosk that he was "captured" by another species, but had DS9 not been there Tosk wouldn't have gone gently into that good night; his ship might have torn itself apart, but he wouldn't have been captured alive in shame. The interference of the Federation both helped and hurt Tosk, and overall one could say it is a wash, and Sisko could legitimately argue the point to the hunters that by their own game rules, DS9 is outside their jurisdiction and so what Sisko chooses to do next -- up to, i.e., send Tosk shuttling away by himself to continue being chased -- is out of the hunters' hands, provided Sisko does not permanently interrupt the game and only did so temporarily. Further, it is not at all clear that the hunters' wishes automatically supersede Tosk's; even without amnesty, Tosk clearly wishes to be allowed to escape to fight another day. At the end of the episode, O'Brien argues that it's in everyone's best interests for Tosk to escape, since the hunters were none too happy about the game ending so soon. Sisko shouts O'Brien down, which makes some sense since I do think O'Brien was providing a rationalization, after the fact, covering (not too well) his real reason -- his commitment to his friend. But that is still a legitimately good point which Sisko could have thought of beforehand; the hunters, indeed, are ecstatic at the idea that the hunt continues, and so had Sisko simply said, "Hey, we'll let you all go back through the wormhole; deal with it there," it may well have satisfied everyone. Or, even, "It is not fair that Tosk was arrested by us. We interfered with your game, so it's only fair for Tosk to get a chance to escape."

As far as the latter, I do think it mostly makes sense to everyone for Tosk to escape -- the hunters mostly seem to want it, Tosk certainly wants it, O'Brien does. But there *is* the matter of the fact that at least one of the hunters suffered what looked like a fatal wound in Tosk's escape. Maybe they "deserved" it for being slavers, but that itself is not really something for the crew to decide; and, more to the point, because they died because of (again) outside interference by O'Brien, the death becomes his responsibility in a way that, say, them dying by Tosk by a scenario not directly created by O'Brien (and abetted by Sisko's DELIBERATE NEGLIGENCE) wouldn't. That's a heck of a thing not even to be addressed. And, yes, had Sisko managed to play out, say, "We are not getting involved; we are letting you both go back through the wormhole and you can continue there," there may not have been those deaths. Anyway, this is speculative; the point is not so much that things definitely would have been better in this alternate scenario I mention, but that it hurts the episode that no alternate scenarios seem to be considered; Sisko and O'Brien both seem to accept as given that O'Brien's actions are the "right" thing and Sisko's the "responsible" thing, when it is not clear to me that this is the case, and when the first aliens from the Gamma Quadrant you encounter die on your station, you might want to consider your foreign policy.

The O'Brien/Tosk bond really does work well, and gives this episode a big bump, making it probably the most effective so far; I just feel like the rest of the cast (especially Sisko) got the short shrift as a result. 3 stars.
Robert - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:24pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

Just out of curiosity, if picked say... 250 issues, is there ONE you'd disagree with the pope on?
Robert - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:23pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

"Actually saying you do not follow all Catholic teachings, so you cannot teach Catholicism doesn`t mean so we generally discriminate towards you. I doubt I`d be allowed to teach at an Islamic school. It is about ministerial positions which is seperate from human rights issues and the issue of discrimination."

Simply the fact that the church considers living as an out gay person to be sinful/not following the Catholic teachings is, quite literally a discriminatory thought. It's backwards, dangerous, and the support for it in the bible is minor compared to not eating ham.

"That is like saying that the church should allow Muslims to teach at Catholic schools because if not they encourage Islamophobia. Again ministerial positions are an exceptional issue."

Simply considering being gay to be a lifestyle, a choice or a position akin to your religion is bigoted and backwards. The fact that you don't realize that is pretty solid proof of the danger of the church and group think that goes along with doctrine.

"Well yes the church needs to protect innocent life, just as it did in the thirties. You cannot receive the body of Christ if you do not wish to protect all innocent humans. "

Except the pope just made a whole bunch of anti-war statements and hawks (a lot of whom are Republican) don't get the same treatment as Democrats. It's political, it's not particularly fair, it's playing favorites and it's wielding too much power.

And it really brings this conversation full circle since the whole point of the conversation was the dangers of religion, Catholicism in particular. So we have a whole slew of Republican candidates, who are Catholic, a pope spouting anti-war rhetoric (and I liked his speech btw), but bishops who'd deny communion to pro-choice candidates but not pro-war candidates. Fairs fair. If ever there was a party of death, it's not the Democrats.
Michael - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:06pm (USA Central)
Re: BSG S2: Resurrection Ship, Part 2

^ I fully echo the above sentiments. The first two seasons were some of the best television ever, period. Season Three was a major letdown: The contrast in quality could not have been starker. Season Four began on the same disappointing note, but picked up very well in the latter half. Indeed, the plot twists toward the end had me as riveted as I was at the beginning, and the finale left me oscillating among unease, hope, gratification, disbelief... Very few shows accomplish that.

Incidentally, much the same pattern can be seen (from my perspective, anyway) in Babylon 5.

Then again, those who know me on these boards know that I hold no truck with mysticism, mythology, mind-trips, and the like. I dislike and avoid them generally, but recoil at their deployment in sci-fi in particular.

All the above being said, I extol B.S.G. head and shoulders above pretty much every sci-fi show ever.
John Logan - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 11:00am (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

Robert @ Thank you for the kind response. Abstinence only worked well in the entire continent of South America.

Actually saying you do not follow all Catholic teachings, so you cannot teach Catholicism doesn`t mean so we generally discriminate towards you. I doubt I`d be allowed to teach at an Islamic school. It is about ministerial positions which is seperate from human rights issues and the issue of discrimination.

That is like saying that the church should allow Muslims to teach at Catholic schools because if not they encourage Islamophobia. Again ministerial positions are an exceptional issue.

Again the two issues are not comparable. Catholic teachers have to follow the Catholic faith, that is different from requiring someone to follow Catholic teachings for a secular job.

The church is seperate from public society, and supposed to be the body of chridt, not a representation of an ideal earthly society.

Suggesting Catholics allow those who oppose the churches teachings to teach at their schools just to set an example is an extreme form of over compensation.

Yeah that is the issue of a two party system, if one of the two supports murdering babies, that creates problem.

The church was often more supportive of the democrats before they embraced the culture of death.

Right now the Republicans seem like a lesser evil as they value all innocent human life.

Well yes the church needs to protect innocent life, just as it did in the thirties. You cannot receive the body of Christ if you do not wish to protect all innocent humans.
Picard - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 9:41am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S2: The Wire

I'm surprised that out of all the comments about this episode nobody mentioned how this episode tackled drug addiction. I find that to be one of the many great aspects of the episode. Many people start doing drugs or any substance just to numb whatever pain they have. Then they continue to do more and more until they are physically addicted. They also show Garak going through withdrawals in a realistic way. I know most fans will mainly like talking about what we learn or don't learn about Garak's past but I think the drug withdrawal aspect should get more appreciation and discussion. Here are some other things I took away from the episode.

This is a story about garak and Bashir mostly but for contract reasons the writers had to give the rest of the cast things to do. But the one scene with Kira at the beginning is so stupid. She comes out of nowhere and says "what was that all about@ First of all she is too far away to hear garak and Bashir talking and Kira couldn't care less that garak and Bashir were having a spat. It was so out of chracter and cheesy.

I did like how Bashir stood up to Odo and wouldn't allow Odo to interrogate Garak. It's always nice when a doctor on Star Trek uses their authority. Everyone knows that even though they are "just" a doctor they are given the authority to order anyone including security or the commanding officers if they feel its medically necessary. And I liked how Odo acknowledged Bashirs authority over him in this matter.

As for Dax she is getting on my last nerve. She comes across as arrogant a lot and in this episode comes across as rude. She tells Bashir that he isn't really friends with Garak. I'm sorry but if you eat lunch with someone once a week talking about art and literature for two years then you are friends. Dax comes across as either mean or an android. And unfortunately she doesn't get any better throughout the series.

Great episode. Deserved 4 stars if any episode does.

William B - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 9:20am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S1: Babel

Like the defense system in "Civil Defense" or "Empok Nor," the virus here is largely has to do with the recognition that this is a station (and a geopolitical situation) with a lot of history; the idea of an old virus designed to attack Cardassians being loosed on the station's new occupants is a decent one. The episode as stands ends up being standard-issue plague story, where, nearly at random, characters succumb to the same symptoms and so we sit through several nearly-identical scenes. This is not really a great subgenre of Trek shows. The nearest equivalent to this is probably "The Naked Time/Now" in terms of being an early plague episode that gets the crew to act weird, but, for all the problems "The Naked Now" had, it had the virtue, as Jammer put it in his review, of not being boring -- to wit, it at least tried to reveal something interesting about the crew via the wacky virus effects. For that matter, even "Genesis" did. There are some decent character moments in the reaction to the virus, but the virus itself, while somewhat interesting as an idea, is never given any character-centric spin, and so it's just a lot of people talking funny.

It's somewhat nice to see Odo and Quark as the last holdouts running the station. I actually like that Odo is someone who really does *not* like being put out of his comfort zone -- something about his fear of compromise, yes, but I think also that he really does not want to be responsible for screwing up or endangering anyone, and has little faith in himself as anything but a security chief. One of my favourite moments in "Emissary" on this viewing was Odo's deer-in-headlights look when Bashir asked him to press down on a disaster victim's wound, and Odo nearly begged for Bashir to get someone more qualified to do this; for all his gruffness, I think Odo is actually genuinely scared he might hurt someone if ever asked to do something he's uncomfortable with. But Odo's protests that he doesn't know how to run a station have him basically being as competent as anyone else, which tends to happen a lot in these types of shows. Quark and Odo chemistry is great -- but yeah, there is too much telling and not enough showing. Favourite moment: Quark's saying he witnessed transporting all kinds of times just as Odo is beaming away. The captain wanting to leave feels like a hoary device to inject extra tension into an episode where the entire staff was about to die anyway.

Kira took a hell of a chance, though, beaming that guy onto the Runabout, given that her "evidence" that he had anything to do with the virus was circumstantial and he very well might have had no idea at all what happened -- and certainly, the odds that he would know how to cure it seem miniscule. Couldn't Kira have sent a message to Bajoran medical experts (if such exist!) or the Federation with Bashir's files and explained the situation, rather than threatening this guy's life on such an extreme long-shot? That this doctor could figure everything out based on Bashir's files in such a short period of time seems pretty convenient. There is always this assumption in Trek (well, DS9 particularly) that if someone creates a disease, they will have or be able to quickly find an antidote (watch "Extreme Measures" -- or, wait, better yet, don't), which I am very skeptical about.

The O'Brien material in the opening acts was indeed a lot of fun -- the next episode is the big O'Brien intro ep/showcase and that does even better, but the frustrated-everyman element works well in these opening scenes.

I feel like there's not much too this episode, and the resolution frankly feels implausible. It has a few things to recommend it, but it's mostly skippable. I'd say 1.5 stars.
William B - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 9:09am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S1: A Man Alone

"Emissary" was largely about Sisko and his ambivalence about Starfleet mission and his emotional scars; "Past Prologue" was Kira reluctantly committing herself fully to working with the Federation -- provisionally. This is about Odo, almost definitely the most interesting of the main cast, and with the best arc. This is not a good episode, but it does do some interesting things to set Odo up.

The first Odo scene is the one in which he recites the old cliche about romance -- he wants to watch football, she wants to listen to music, so you compromise, i.e., do exactly what she wants. First of all, we rather know/suspect that Odo is *not* speaking from experience. I forget when it is that he actually starts reading Mickey Spellane, but he already describes his hypothetical self as liking Earth jazz, and so it may be that Odo's found some identification figures in the hard-boiled detective genre. Whereas Data identifies with Sherlock Holmes -- brilliant, intuitive, eccentric -- Odo identifies with Mike Hammer, who, well let me quote Wikipedia:

"While pulp detectives such as Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe are hard-boiled and cynical, Hammer is in many ways the archetypal "hard man": brutally violent, and fueled by a genuine rage against violent crime that never afflicts Raymond Chandler's or Dashiell Hammett's heroes. In The Big Kill Hammer describes himself to a bargirl as a misanthrope. Hammer is also loosely based on the real-life hard-boiled Texas Ranger and gunfighter Frank Hamer, who was most famous for tracking down and killing Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker in 1934.

While other hardboiled heroes bend and manipulate the law, Hammer often views it as an impediment to justice, the one virtue he holds in absolute esteem. Hammer nevertheless has a strong respect for the majority of police, realizing they have a difficult job and their hands are frequently tied by the law when trying to stop criminals.

Mike Hammer is a no-holds-barred private investigator who carries a .45 Colt M1911A1 in a shoulder harness under his left arm. His love for his secretary Velda is outweighed only by his willingness to kill a killer. Hammer's best friend is Pat Chambers, Captain of Homicide NYPD. Hammer was a WWII army veteran who spent two years fighting jungle warfare in the Pacific theatre against Japan. Hammer is also patriotic and anti-communist. The novels are peppered with remarks by Hammer supporting American troops in Korea, and in Survival...Zero Vietnam. In One Lonely Night, where Hammer attends a communist meeting in a park, his reaction to the speaker's propaganda is a sarcastic "Yeah."

So far as violence is concerned, the Hammer novels leave little to the imagination. Written in the first person, Hammer describes his violent encounters with relish. In all but a few novels, Hammer's victims are often left vomiting after a blow to the stomach or groin.

The Washington Times obituary of Spillane said of Hammer, "In a manner similar to Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry, Hammer was a cynical loner contemptuous of the 'tedious process' of the legal system, choosing instead to enforce the law on his own terms."[2]"

Odo's emphasis on JUSTICE above all else ends up manifesting, a lot of the time, as outright misanthropy, cynicism about all humanoid nature, and an INTENSE DISLIKE of compromise. Unlike Hammer, Odo avoids firearms and does seem to mostly abhor violence. Odo's armchair philosophizing about humanoid relationships is from someone who has an outsider's perspective, but a real outsider's outsider, whose understanding of intimate relationships is very limited. His hatred of compromise on a personal level comes out in his similar distrust of due process, which we see in an early scene with Sisko:

SISKO: If he hasn't done anything wrong, you can't just arbitrarily force him to leave.
ODO: Watch me.
SISKO: Mister Odo, you're not going to take the law into your own hands.
ODO: The law? Commander, laws change depending on who's making them. Cardassians one day, Federation the next. But justice is justice, and as long as I'm in charge of security --
SISKO: If you can't work within the rules, I'll find someone who can.

Odo believes that Ibudan is a scumbag who should not be allowed on Odo's Promenade. Bajorans hail this guy, who smuggled medical supplies for a price, as a hero, but Odo saw him for who he really was, the guy who let a little girl die for not meeting the price. Ibudan killed a Cardassian, and the Bajorans let him go because they no longer see that as murder. Now, it seems likely that Ibudan is a jerk, to start with, and it becomes even more clear as the episode goes on, once it is revealed that he created a clone of himself to kill in order to frame Odo (!). But still, we don't necessarily have to take Odo's moral judgment as entirely reliable. Lots of people did terrible things during the Bajoran Occupation, including Kira ("Necessary Evil") and Odo himself ("Things Past"); the Bajoran provisional government's amnesty for Ibudan may be false justice, or it may, in fact, reflect a broader perspective than the one Odo is willing to take. In any case, being the arresting officer for the guy back in the day, Odo believes he knows the content of the man's soul, when he knows a lot less than he believes. Odo reluctantly plays ball (so to speak) with Sisko and his damned rules, insisting that people who are not under any legal sanctions have the "right" to walk around freely, the nerve!

Odo's belief that he should be the law is based on the idea that he, as an outsider to humanoid society, is in a unique position to see justice. And to some extent he is correct -- he is able to see hypocrisy and weakness in humanoids pretty readily, seems to be well-equipped to spot liars, and he is certainly correct that humanoids have a tendency to rationalize away their own actions rather than face the meaning of their actions. Part of his ability to sniff out hypocrisy shows up in that great scene where he chews out Sisko for kindly telling him he doesn't suspect him -- WHY DOES SISKO NOT SUSPECT HIM? -- pointing out that there is no objective basis for Sisko's claim. He is not tempted by pleasures of the flesh and he doesn't let his emotions get in the way. However, his inability to understand real closeness (with his love-hate relationship with Quark and his mutual respect for Kira being the main exceptions) means that he misses a fundamental part of what makes humanoids tick, and as it turns out, when he is tempted by pleasures of the...flesh? goo?...and the possibility of real intimacy, he totally breaks down and abandons his own ethical code (i.e. "Behind the Lines"). Things, as it turns out, are more complicated than Odo thinks.

So I don't think it's an accident that the mob screaming for Odo's head is demanding the same thing Odo insists is an absolute -- justice. The angry mob becomes a foil for Odo because they represent his belief that he understands moral absolutes which others are simply unwilling to deal with, taken to an extreme. Odo at least has the decency to be a good investigator -- he even refuses to cover up evidence that points to him as a suspect, so unbending is his personal code, when not threatened by love or intimacy (for Kira, or the Founders, etc.). The angry mob are irrational and crazed, bouncing between a legitimate objection to Odo's conflict of interest as investigator and prime suspect to xenophobia and anger at him as collaborator without seeming to have any interest in sorting out which feelings are their main ones. And then as it turns out, Ibudan himself is seeking his own type of personal "justice" -- he wants revenge on the person who turned him in, for killing a *Cardassian* during the Bajoran occupation. We never hear Ibudan's side of the story, which is to the episode's detriment; it seems he probably is just an evil man, no question, but I kind of imagine his version of events would paint Odo as the obsessive, unfeeling man who arrested a smuggler of much-needed medical supplies for killing one of the Occupiers of their planet. No doubt these would be rationalizations, incomplete and self-serving, but that is the point. Odo's honour, such as it is, comes in that he mostly holds himself to the same standards that he holds others, but his weakness is that he believes that his outsider status gives his judgment an objectivity and infallibility that is *not possible* for anyone to have.

The episode is largely a failure overall because as a murder mystery, there's no real way to get the answer, and it's not even *Odo* who figures it out -- it's just that Bashir waved an instrument around until he found a weird thing, and then that weird thing grew into a person. It's maybe a step above "it was the dog who was actually a shapeshifter" ala "Aquiel" and maybe on a similar level to "actually he was never dead because he could make himself seem dead" ala "Suspicions." (These three episodes in the same year do not speak highly of Trek's ability to craft a good murder mystery.) The ending has the (admittedly fairly silly in execution) mob disappear, leaves Ibudan with nothing to say, and doesn't give any real payoff to the Odo plotline in terms of Odo's own experiences; it ends up, after a somewhat promising first couple of acts, to be a bunch of stuff that happens and ends.

I like the Keiko subplot; I like the idea that she gets it in her head to be a teacher and then dedicates it to herself fully. She wants to be useful. I could have done without Jake and Nog's hijinks with the itchy-and-colour-modifying-fleas to justify why a school is necessary, but, well, I guess they need to demonstrate the negative aspects of the Jake & Nog friendship somehow. The establishment of the DS9 world as a real community being built almost from the ground up is pretty effective. We also, in this plot, meet Rom 1.0, who is basically nothing like later Roms the series gives us, though at least we can say that this is a Rom still intent on impressing his brother by being like him. I like that Rom insists that Nog *not* spend time with that hew-mon boy; Sisko's slight look at that line makes him realize, maybe a bit, that it's not all that friendly to make such restrictions on his own son. It is different being the pariah than being the one who objects to the pariah, no?

The Dax stuff with both Sisko and Bashir falls flat. I don't know if I'd say that Terry Farrell ever gets *very good* in the role, but once the character essentially gets rebooted into fun-loving jack-of-all-trades she seems a heck of a lot more comfortable.

Funniest line: Sisko's log entry at the end: "Ibudan has been turned over to the Bajoran authorities just hours after his clone gained consciousness and began a new life." Hahaha.

2 stars overall.
William B - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 8:37am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S1: Past Prologue

Kira is forced to choose between an angry man who issues threats at her when he's not sullenly silent, whose mercurial shifts in moods render her totally confused...and an old Bajoran acquaintance named Tahna. (Rim-shot.) No, I kid. I don't think the real purpose of this episode is to make *us* doubt where Kira's loyalties lie when she's being put between her burgeoning loyalty to Sisko and the Federation presence on DS9 and her loyalty to old resistance fighter friends who have become extremist reactionaries; Tahna is clearly the villain, especially when he gets to the late-game mustache-twirling I'LL BLOW UP THIS MOON stage. What it does do is give Kira a reason to recognize that she is at least more pro-Federation than a lot of other Bajorans, to give her a reason to see herself as being on Sisko's side instead of being opposed to him. That neither Sisko nor Kira seem all that interested in what the Cardassians' charges against Tahna are, and that Danar never gets around to saying them (HE KILLED PEOPLE! HE ATTACKED US! HE TOTALLY DID LOTS OF BAD STUFF, WHICH IS NOT WORTH SPECIFYING!) is frustrating, though at least in Kira's case there is the big sense that she is still very much in DO NOT GIVE THE CARDASSIANS AN INCH! mode, and semi-consciously omitting any data about what might make Tahna a threat in the present. Kira identifies with Tahna, and she assumes that his crimes are the type of crimes she might have committed; she has guilt over what she herself did during the Occupation, but also knows/believes that she was justified by what the Cardassians did. She both is unwilling to re-examine her own behaviour, probably understandably, and is unwilling to start examining the behaviour of others, in the now, because it might reflect badly on What The Bajorans Did To Survive, which is actually a problem with her job.

I do like that Tahna's ultimate plan involved blowing up the entrance to the wormhole. It plays differently knowing what is to come in the series, that he's basically talking about cutting Bajor off from the Celestial Temple, but it seems that not everyone got the memo that this is a religious site. Despite his cartoonish threats, Tahna really was serious about not killing any more people, and his plan will indeed remove the need for Federation protection -- just as it removes a whole lot of possibilities for Bajor to be part of a galactic community. And that is the big rub: do you blow up your own oil fields so that people stop trying to "help" you or invade you? And what if doing so happens to hurt your own society, which, deep down, is badly in need of all the help it can get? Kira's understandable isolationism does not extend to destroying things which might actually help Bajor, just because they bring it (unwanted) attention; and the recognition that, yeah, she'd rather have the wormhole and the Federation and the headaches that come with it than lose the wormhole and allow extremist factions to push all possible allies away and go Bajor For Bajorans.

Garak! "Emissary" introduced the main cast, plus the wormhole aliens, plus Dukat, Nog, Opaka, Jennifer, and, uh, Morn. This episode introduces Garak, and while it won't be until season two that we see him again he is a great sight to see. The way he approaches/manipulates Bashir is really fascinating -- he has to know something about Bashir's naivete, and it is pretty ahrd to tell whether, at this point in time, Garak sees Bashir more as a brilliant but naive ingenue that maybe could use some mentoring or a young foll who is an easy mark; probably a bit of both. He pushes Bashir in ways beyond the limits of what is socially acceptable, and gives him very little room to maneuver without facing embarrassment, but he also, I think, recognizes that Bashir *wants* someone to push him into a spy adventure story that he would, truth be told, be too afraid to pursue directly. Julian is fascinated and afraid and Garak plays him so wonderfully throughout. Bashir's somewhat juvenile reactions do strain credibility a bit, but I guess we are seeing some Wesley Crusher-style gullible wunderkind story bits left over, and, let's be frank, Garak would make anyone uncomfortable but fascinated.

Garak obviously brings this episode up quite a bit, but the Kira material, while a bit hamhanded at points, is fair too. A low 3 stars.
William B - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 8:19am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S1: Emissary

Deep Space Nine! I doubt I will be able to write up every episode for this rewatch, but I will do what I can.

As mostly everyone has pointed out, the opening sequence at Wolf 359 was excellent and a very interesting way to start the series. And right away, this series' focus is established as being about the long-term effects of the Big Events that shake the Federation and other major powers, as depicted in TNG. The Borg meant something very particular to Picard and Riker, and to the world of the Federation as we in the audience perceived it; and it also meant something very particular to Sisko and his wife. Sisko's "origin story"/formative trauma of Jennifer's death makes him an audience identification point to understanding at least *some* of what it is that Bajor has lost, as a result of Bajor's devastating encounter with a much larger power (the Cardassians).

One of the questions the show gestures to -- though it does so imperfectly, to say the least -- is also the question of what it is that makes the Federation different from other major powers, like the Borg and the Cardassians; Abigail Nussbaum (at askingthewrongquestions.blogspot.com) suggested that the opening sequence of the series, featuring Locutus as avatar for the Borg collective, sets up the show's alternate (possible) take on the Federation -- as a force which imposes a kind of homogenized order on the galaxy, which Eddington later explicitly compares to the Borg and which Quark and Garak (in "The Way of the Warrior") talk about with regards to the spreading of root beer throughout the Alpha Quadrant. The Federation is *not* the Borg, and it is not the Cardassians, but the real question is why *this* big, major power is different from the other ones. Initially at least, Kira is unconvinced that the Federation are much of a step up from the Cardassians. And Sisko himself, it seems, cannot get straight in his head that Picard and Locutus are *not* the same person; he has some residual resentment toward Picard as authority figure who represents both Starfleet and the Borg in his head. This shows up in the Wormhole Aliens sequence, too, where the Wormhole Aliens talk through Picard to Sisko about their attempts to communicate with other life forms, and through Locutus about corporeal beings' -- and Sisko's, in particular -- malevolence, and need to be destroyed. Picard admires and cares for the Bajoran people and wants their entry into the Federation, to benefit the Federation and to benefit Bajor; Locutus wants everyone to join with him by force. And Sisko, at least initially, cannot distinguish between Picard and Locutus, or between the Federation and the Borg.

The episode's *setup* is that the Federation takes over Terok Nor, etc., but the major event of the first episode is the discovery of the wormhole. It is a major transformative point for other characters (and species) as well -- the wormhole is what changes the Cardassians from wanting to dump Bajor, having been used up, to wanting to reclaim it; it is what Odo (in a hamfisted bit of exposition) credits with the possible set of answers to his problems; it is what makes Deep Space Nine and Bajor major centres of commerce and locations of strategic importance; and it's what leads Kira to recognize, with a start, that maybe alienating all possible friends and allies is not such a good idea.

The biggest change, though, is in Sisko: Sisko's transformation in this episode is from reluctant outsider who wants nothing to do with the Bajor job, and indeed doesn't even want anything to do with Starfleet, to something of a true believer in the Federation mission on Bajor, with desire to help Bajor. His transformation occurs as a result of his "time" with the Aliens in the wormhole (I'm not going to say Prophets). Given that the first season drops the Wormhole Aliens as a plot point for the first couple of episodes, and indeed their identification with The Prophets is something that only happens eventually (Tahna's attempt to blow up the wormhole in "Past Prologue" doesn't lead Kira to mention the importance of the Celestial Temple, e.g.); for now, the wormhole aliens serve as a conduit to Sisko to

a) get back in touch with why Federation desire for exploration is different from the Borg desire for conquest; and
b) (importantly) realize that the Wormhole Aliens' nonlinear time is analogous to his own refusal to move on from the moment of Jennifer's death.

Sisko's "pitch" (ha) to the Wormhole Aliens about the importance of exploration, of communicating with other cultures, of the difference between aggressive communication, etc., is somewhat analogous to Picard's defense of humanity before Q in "Encounter at Farpoint," in terms of its statement of Trek philosophy and it's implied positioning of these ultra-powerful life forms as potential judges. Unlike Picard, though, Sisko only believes what he is saying once he is explaining it to the wormhole aliens. They call him on the fact that he doesn't entirely believe what he is saying, and the key reason is Jennifer. "We explore our lives! We seek out the unknown! We court danger! We love opening ourselves up to risks!" is something that's easy to say when you haven't had your wife die in front of you; and Sisko has indeed, apparently, partly given up on that central Trekkian philosophy because of her death. Being forced to see it allows him the chance to get unstuck in time.

Where the episode falls down is that the Wormhole Aliens sequence, which is basically the climactic, Most Important sequence in the episode, is chopped up, frequently badly acted (Stewart is great, though), relies again on Piller's weird baseball fixation, goes through endless iterations of the same format (Sisko: It is X! Wormhole Aliens: What is X? Sisko: X is Y! WA: What is Y?) -- and on top of all that, the moment where the Wormhole Aliens (apparently?) grant permanent passage through the wormhole is placed off screen. That no one is sent to study the Wormhole Aliens after this -- and even Science Officer Dax ignores them -- is very annoying, and that there is no payoff with Opaka here (and we have to wait for "Battle Lines") is particularly strange, given that the whole You Are The Emissary schtick was presented as a big deal in-episode, and will be a big deal in the whole series. The episode has a lot of interesting ideas that fizzle and fall apart at the end, making for an unsatisfying pilot experience.

The exposition is often very clunky -- Odo's Denarius Belt speech foremost of all. Dax is a total blank at this point. Sisko's blackmailing Quark is kind of weirdly unpleasant, and while I know that we don't have to approve of all his actions, his shrugging off Quark's concern that he and his family will be *summarily executed by revolutionary Bajoran nationalists* is pretty extreme. I do think that Kira's raw-nerve anger makes sense, though, and Bashir's naivete comes across pretty well. O'Brien is a great presence -- though, yes, his goodbye with Picard is somewhat painful ("This is your favourite transporter room, isn't it!" oh dear Lord); I'm glad that Picard and Miles have a small moment in "All Good Things" showing Picard's recollection of O'Brien building model ships, so that this is not actually the last moment between the two, even if they were never meant to be best friends. Dukat's scenes are awesome; what a great character.

Overall, I'd say 2.5 stars.
Robert - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 7:01am (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

Moving away from abortion (since that's really a non starter on the internet and I'm not sure why I let it go along that far anyways). I agree with much of what you say. We obviously need to put some sins in the legal code and we obviously don't want to stone everyone that sins. And yes, fathers pay child support but the only other crime in which one loses bodily autonomy are those which carry capital punishment. Consider that. But obviously a large % of the population is judeo-christian and some of their values are going to end up in the legal code. I don't mean to suggest a blanket "anything the bible says should be out of the law books". That "thou shalt not kill" thing is pretty useful (and yes I see how you might take that bait on abortion, but resist the temptation... as I said before, to me it's about losing the right to your body, not about not killing).

"Actually they teach chastity which is a full proof way to prevent the spread of HIV, which is why South America and the Philippines or even Ireland have less then the world wide average."

Correlation does not prove causation. I don't pretend to be an expert on those countries, but it's pretty well established in this country that abstinence only education doesn't work. I can't imagine it works better in the Philippines, but I can't argue that which I have no information about.

"Discrimination by religious institutions for ministerial positions is different from secular public discrimination. "

I didn't say it shouldn't be allowed. I fully support the right of the church to fire gay people, adulterers, and gamblers. But you cannot say "You are not a good moral person, you cannot teach my children" and assume that it does not contribute to general discrimination against gay people. My point in bringing that up is that the church IS part of the problem here. It's nice they give lip service to "don't discriminate against gays" but until they stop doing so their flock will continue.

"You confuse public life, and private religious institutions."

I don't think so, I just believe that people who call themselves father should be aware that only bad parents don't lead by example. If you say "don't discriminate against gays" you have to do it yourself in order for your children to follow you.

"Well Democrats who support the murder of babies, yes they are refused communion. That is not an unconditional endorsement of the republican. The church also excomunicated all Nazis and Communists in the thiries while not unconditionally supporting either Social Democrats or Nationalists."

Again, this is a follow the leader thing. The Democratic presidential candidate in a 2 party system is not welcome to receive communion under my roof... but that's not an endorsement to not vote for them. Come now, you cannot believe that... and this is never applied evenly either, it's a dog and pony show. And largely it's why I don't attend church and my kids won't either. If people like me are not welcome under your roof, neither am I. You must realize this is done to affect power over the elections.
Blackfire - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 4:25am (USA Central)
Re: DS9 S4: The Visitor

"there is a moment where Jake and his father are alone and Jake can't even speak- he just drops his head and cries"

I also lost my father as a boy. Whenever I do encounter him in a dream again, that's the only thing I can do, too. Probably why the episode resonates with me so strongly, those moments in particular.
King Elessar 8 - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:16am (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Allegiance

As far as this episode portraying Picard as a "stick in the mud who never has any fun" and likes to read alone until he falls asleep - well yeah. This is hardly the first time the show has made this point, see the very recent "Captain's Holiday" for an even more blatant example of this characterization of the good Captain. This also explains why the crew is so nonplussed by the Faux-Picard's behavior that they instantly start thinking about removing him; it's completely and totally out of character. It's ok - unsociable curmudgeon he may be, but we all love Picard anyway.
NCC-1701-Z - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 1:04am (USA Central)
Re: BSG S2: Resurrection Ship, Part 2

@Patrick: I'm with you there - I think the show hit its peak with the Pegasus-Resurrection Ship I & II trilogy, and declined from there. Season 3 was my least favorite season overall, and Season 4 was good, but not as good as Season 1 and the first half of 2. I still enjoyed seasons 3 and 4 a lot (especially the last half of season 4), just not as much as 1 and 2.

I've been trying to understand why I didn't like seasons 3 and 4 as much as season 1-2 - I think it's because they took the detour into mythology and stuff which was a sharp decline in momentum from the whole daily-battle-for-survival. It felt like the series was slowing down and thus wasn't nearly *as* interesting and compelling as S1-2 until S4's "Revelations" onward.

Just my two cents; I completely understand anyone who thinks differently.
NCC-1701-Z - Tue, Jun 23, 2015, 12:53am (USA Central)
Re: ENT S4: Storm Front, Part II

@Peter: Yay, another fellow Whovian on this board! I never thought of the laser-equipped WWII planes in "Victory of the Daleks" as being ripped off from this episode, but I see your point.

This episode was enjoyable, but overall forgettable. It felt like a really weird detour needed to justify the "WTF" cliffhanger at the end of "Zero Hour".

And I'm really tired of evil alien Nazis. Note to the next Trek TV series: if you must pick a group of evil humans from the past to use as a punching bag, please pick something else from some other era, like the Augment soldiers from the Eugenics Wars (Khan et al) - a historical era we never actually saw on the series. Now that would be interesting.
Patrick - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 9:31pm (USA Central)
Re: BSG S2: Resurrection Ship, Part 2

MisterBenn, SlackerInc

I will avoid any spoilers after Resurrection ship part 2.

I agree that the show declines in quality, but I would put the start of that around early season 3. I still think it's worth watching all the way.

The first two seasons are great, and Pegasus is probably the single best episode (or maybe 33). The core of the show is the character drama, but there are also interesting events events that occur, such as finding Kobol, meeting Pegasus, etc. Early in season 3 these events become rarer. The fleet kind of cruises on autopilot. With no plot to react to, the characters get stuck in bickering and angst. The mythology and Cylon history, which never really are compelling or even make that much sense,, become a bigger focus.

I don't think it's ever unwatchable (though there's a notorious boxing episode that comes close) but it loses something along the way.

Darknet - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 8:59pm (USA Central)
Re: VOY S4: Prey

Was I the only one disappointed that Tuvok did not echo Seven's stance on the issue. Janeway's decision was illogical to say the least. The needs of the many out-weigh the needs of the few. Tuvok should have been right by Seven in his view. Of course in the end, I would expect him to follow orders.
Xylar - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 7:58pm (USA Central)
Re: VOY S7: Nightingale

Harry tries on the big boy pants. We all knew where this was going. He'd start with overconfidence, events would occur that made him doubt himself as a leader, someone gives him a peptalk and he accepts his limits and saves the day.
And then he's just plain old Harry Kim again. Poor guy has one interesting episode over the course of 7 seasons. That's rough. I always kind of liked Harry, but it seems he was destined to come in last.
The Icheb/B'elanna subplot was meh. It's believable, given what we know about Icheb but not really funny or interesting. Another episode of nothing really happened or changed and I doubt I'll remember this episode for very long.
Frances Yozawitz - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 6:23pm (USA Central)
Re: TOS S3: The Lights of Zetar

I love Star Trek.& Lost in Space.
dlpb - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 5:23pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S6: Relics

If you're going to use a stupid plot device in order to bring a character back from the dead - at least make it worthwhile. Dear god, what was this episode all about? Once they had Scotty back they just didn't know what to do with him. People on that ship would have been in awe... he's a legend in Starfleet and now he's back. It was even worse when they brought Kirk back with that stupid Nexus...
dlpb - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:05pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S6: Time's Arrow, Part II

"I keep telling you there is no plot!"

"Yes, you do keep telling me that."

John Logan - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 3:32pm (USA Central)
Re: TNG S3: Who Watches the Watchers

Robert@ Most abortions are for healthy pregnancies when women freely consented to sex. No I want to make sure the fetus doesn`t pay for it instead. It didn`t do anything.

No you eho conceived this life knowing it would be dependent on you, should take care of the live you created, you are doing something wrong if you create a live just to kill it. Whether it is wrong to create a life or not, depends on whether you do it responsibly. Getting children isn`t a crime, but fathers still have to pay child support.

You can consider adultery a sin without advocating stoning them. You can consider masturbation a sin, without wanting to beat up children who do it. According to the church we all struggle with sin and need to fight our natural sinful tendencies. Yet we should treat eachother with kindness and leave the judgement up to God.

Forcing into the legal code that all human beings have a right to live, is basic human kidness.

Actually they teach chastity which is a full proof way to prevent the spread of HIV, which is why South America and the Philipines or even Ireland have less then the world wide average.

Actually it makes sense to believe God punishes sinners, yet as we are not without sin, we cannot cast the first stone and need to forgive others their tresspassings, so others may be forgiven.

Catholic schools only hire teachers who agree with and live by church teachings. Discrimination by religious institutions for ministerial positions is different from secular public discrimination. The church fires all who dissent from her teachings, from positions where they are to teach the Catholic faith. One has to be a commited Catholic or at least a crypto Catholic Christian to teach Catholicism.

Yes the pope supports the right of the church, to appoint her own ministers. So did the founding fathers. The church believes in the right of women to receive any job with equal pay except the priesthood as that is a religious position. For example I am against firing people because they are Muslims but ofcourse this would be normal if they wanted to teach at a Protestant or Jewish school. You confuse public life, and private religious institutions.

Well Democrats who support the murder of babies, yes they are refused communion. That is not an unconditional endorsement of the republican. The church also excomunicated all Nazis and Communists in the thiries while not unconditionally supporting either Social Democrats or Nationalists.

Pope Francis also did this in Argentina, if people support the murder of innocent life, then they do follow the teachings of Christ and his church, and should not eat the flesh of the man who taught us to love the weak, not murder them for being weak. He taught us the narrow path, not that we can be irresponsible and make our weak children pay for our actions.
Peter - Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 2:33pm (USA Central)
Re: ENT S4: Storm Front, Part II

Now-I am a Brit and I absolutely love Doctor Who...but the idea of World War Two iconic aircraft shooting laser weapons was nicked from this episode and transplanted to the Spitfire attack on the Dalek Flying Saucer in 2010's Victory of the Daleks.
I too liked Archer's knowing self aware comment to Sillik,thought Silik was rather likeable in this one but this episode's greatest significance is the end of that mind boggling baloney that was the temporal cold war.
Next »« PreviousPage 5 of 1010
Copyright © 1994-2015, Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of any review or article on this site is prohibited. Star Trek (in all its myriad forms), Battlestar Galactica, and Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc., NBC Universal, and Tribune Entertainment, respectively. This site is in no way affiliated with or authorized by any of those companies. | Copyright & Disclaimer