Posted on 06/25/2016 7:32:28 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
The one thing I never understood about TNG, how could they travel between galaxies, transport themselves down to alien planets, invent human looking robots that were smarter and stronger than humans, and with all that, still not find a cure for baldness.
Caitlyn Jenner as Captain Kirk. Calling it now.
First storyline: The crew discovers Captain Caitlyn has a Klingon.
“Of my friend I can only say this: of all the souls that I met on my travels, his was the most… human.”
If that means the new Star Trek will start being more realistic about human nature, something that Roddenberry resisted strenuously, that’s a good thing. If it means that the new Star Trek will be a boring platform for left-wing evangelizing, I’ll pass.
Our always promoted Marxism.
Pray America wakes
I saw this on another site and it was an answer to the question of whether the new Trek would have homos. Fuller is, himself, a homo, and the vocal Trek SWJs have been demanding a gay male, so I never doubted it. It’s set in the pre-Abrams universe, so it’s a shame, but I’ll have nothing to do with it.
Yeah, that Saturday Night Live “Ambiguously Gay Duo” skit was just a few years ahead of its time.
uh huh. well, looks like the franchise is truly dead then.
good riddance.
Surely, int he future, if they found a way for interstellar travel, technology would have found a cure for homosexuality.
The whole “Prime Directive” if you think about it is stupid plus they constantly break it unless it is necessary for a plot.
Good Wife was sickeningly leftist progressive. So is the new series by good wife’s creators.
TNG was far more progressive than TOS. TOS had a strong captain who flaunted the rules and was a womanizer. But he was a just leader and relatively “open minded”. TNG liked to explore social issues and those storylines were somewhat boring. Some things made no sense- for instance a supposedly egalitarian world where miraculously nobody needs money (which literally means nobody has any earnings), but Picard’s brother has a small estate and a vineyard.
I’ll rather root for Klingons.
The concept that Star Trek embraced where everything in society was based upon merit is an anathema to erasing financial considerations.
You can never, ever, I don’t care that aliens show up, erase the desire for more. More power, more money, more women, more drink/food etc.
Enemies at the Gate pretty much summed it up when the political officer sacrificed himself for Zaitsev. Men will always be richer in some areas, in that case the love/devotion of a woman that didn’t love him back.
If you can never erase the desire for more, for competition, for love and affection you cannot erase the concept of money.
Yes, it’s nice that people in Star Trek would be free to be the best curler without having to work at Home Depot for minimum wage and living in a trailer.
However you could never turn off the human nature that drives a Hitler, Putin, Jobs, Gates, Rockefeller or Carnegie.
Star Trek has always been progressive since TNG
1. Picard was a total pu$$y
2. They has a therapist/counselor on board
3. They has a dreadlocked haired ugly harpy that everybody pretended was good looking.
They already did that with that wimpy little whiner they had as captain on USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D.
The only Captain I liked was Sisko.
He knew how to kick butt and take names.
So what role will Flo play?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.