New Star Trek series - 2017

billysielu said:
What's LGBTQ about that?


As if there's a difference.
Click to expand...
Huh? Ofcourse there is. Politics is to do with government and affairs of state. Not sure how two people of same sex kissing is relevant to anything political or the well being of a state. Bigotry closes ones mind to others view. In critical moments, men sometimes see exactly what they wish to see.
 
Riker was getting jiggy with a non gender specific being in the early 90's in TNG and DS9 had lesbian kisses (no doubt you were fine with that though?)

So insecure about your own sexuality you can't bear to see men kiss?
 
VincentHanna said:
Riker was getting jiggy with a non gender specific being in the early 90's in TNG and DS9 had lesbian kisses (no doubt you were fine with that though?)

So insecure about your own sexuality you can't bare to see men kiss?
Click to expand...
Lol what's it got to do with my sexuality. I don't care what people do in private, but I find it disgusting and I don't want to see it. I didn't sign up for brokeback in space. It adds nothing to the story and is only there to make a political statement.
You're right that on occasion when women in star trek kissed I didn't really care.
 
The point is, Star Trek has always been about acceptance, working together. TNG was basically Picard and crew as the United Nations, with lots of moralising and speeches.

That seems to have been lost on you.
 
Again you were fine with Uhuru (Black), Chekov (God damn commie) and Scotty ((Scottish)not really) as these were political...maybe not Scotty.
Amusingly, looking back, most people have no objection and would probably label those who do as something.
 
VincentHanna said:
The point is, Star Trek has always been about acceptance, working together. TNG was basically Picard and crew as the United Nations, with lots of moralising and speeches.
That seems to have been lost on you.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to reply to any of your posts if you keep putting snarky comments at the end

Stusteel said:
Again you were fine with Uhuru (Black), Chekov (God damn commie) and Scotty ((Scottish)not really) as these were political...maybe not Scotty.
Amusingly, looking back, most people have no objection and would probably label those who do as something.
Click to expand...
On homosexuality, I take the whole "nature requires a man and a woman" stance - we don't need to have that debate, this is just about whether it should be in star trek or not - we've made our opinions clear :)
So IMO it's not comparable to the other examples - i.e. obviously there's nothing wrong with someone being cast because of their race, people might not have liked it at the time, but now things are different. Biology will still be the same in 50 years.
 
S01E05-iKsrxHSk-subtitled.jpg
 
So we have moved from politics to social to conceiving a child? If only I could keep up with where your argument is.
What has love got to do with man and woman? Or can males only love females? Remove conception as that is not the be all and end all to love.
Your argument is that a man should not love another man because nature requires a man and women (to conceive)? So therefore should not ne in a fiction serious? If it happens in real life, social, why not in fantasy?

Anyway, this is way OT. You have your view on it.

Off topic, or is it on topic, have any other major species traversed universes? Just seems to be Federation in this party?
 
some pretty pathetic views in here, 2 adults kissed, it was part of the story arc, move on, it was pretty tastefully done as post death dream/wake/vision.
 
Django x2 said:
Totally saw that coming. But two guys kissing each other? Count me out
Click to expand...

I must admit to feeling this way 20-25 years ago when I first saw it on TV (My Pink Launderette?). But now? I'm totally ok with it, I just see it as a natural expression of passion/love between two people. I think that's called progress :)
 
billysielu said:
I'm not going to reply to any of your posts if you keep putting snarky comments at the end


On homosexuality, I take the whole "nature requires a man and a woman" stance - we don't need to have that debate, this is just about whether it should be in star trek or not - we've made our opinions clear :)
So IMO it's not comparable to the other examples - i.e. obviously there's nothing wrong with someone being cast because of their race, people might not have liked it at the time, but now things are different. Biology will still be the same in 50 years.
Click to expand...
making a baby may require male and female parts.

However love is separate to that. If two people fall in love then it doesn't matter what gender they are.

If they are happy and care for each other, that's all that matters.
 
steve5424 said:
making a baby may require male and female parts.
However love is separate to that. If two people fall in love then it doesn't matter what gender they are.
If they are happy and care for each other, that's all that matters.
Click to expand...
I said I'm fine with people doing whatever - but I'm not fine with having to watch it.

MooMoo444 said:
Homophobia is so last century. If you're giving up on the best Star Trek to date, then your loss.
Click to expand...
As much as you/hollywood would like this to be true - it isn't true. It's so right now, and will always exist, because biology won't change.
Curious if you think it's the best star trek because of the gay kiss, or just because you like the rest of the show?
 
Hell's bells. All those perfectly valid things to criticise this series for, and some people still go with 'oh noes, gay characters, that's disgusting and besides the showrunners must be trying to make a political statement!!!11111oneoneeleven'...:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom