Re: [ST1-LCN] Cogenitor - SPOILERS
- Mithril1960@... wrote:
>I disagree. I approve of Trip's actions. Human rights should be
> Before I begin, have I ever mentioned my fondness for Spagetti? Yep, I love
> that stuff. I eat it quite often and make my own sauce. Occasionally I have
> it with meatballs or chicken or veal cutlets. Italian cuisine is indeed my
> Now that I've mentioned that, if you haven't seen the COGENITOR episode of
> Enterprise, please don't read any further.
> I'll repeat - PLEASE DON'T READ ANY FURTHER.
> What seemed to be a rip off TNG's ep where Riker fell in love with the
> asexual person turned into a fine morality play. I'm not to impressed with
> Trips acting ability and he failed to emote (for me) in the end as he should
> have. But this ep, with Trip impressing earthly/human mores on an alien
> species and nearly blowing the best first Contact of Enterprises two years of
> mission was well done. Trip was quite foolish in this one, even more than
> usual. It was nice to see Andreas Katsulas in this ep as well. A fine actor,
> his voice really makes his roles great. I was really surprised at the ending
> and I think that Trips stern talking to wasn't enough. He should have been
> busted down a rank for this or given a reduction in privileges or something.
defended, even at the expense of a "good first contact". Especially
in Archer's time when there is no prime directive yet. I don't
like the fact that Archer didn't extend asylum to Charles. I believe
that would have been the right thing to do, and if he did do it,
there would probably not have been a suicide. The cogenitor would
have had a chance to explore and grow and get stronger. Maybe then
"it" could have gone back to its people and help liberate others
from a state that could only be compared to slavery. I just don't
get it... how can a Federation ever be formed from this group of
people that don't value human rights enough to stand up and defend
them? I think Star Trek is losing its moral center and "prime
directive" thinking is being used as an excuse too often not to do
the right thing, and that it is ok. The prime directive is only a
guideline (or it should only be such), and any captain that I would
want to follow would know when it is appropriate to violate that
guideline. All the best captains have routinely violated the directive
when it meant going along with something immoral or wrong, and that
is one of the things I liked about all the previous captains. They
would stand up for their principles - even sacrifice their careers
and everything they knew if it meant doing the right thing.
> Query: Have the Vissians ever shown up in any other Trek? Even in a mention?I don't think we've ever met them before. They did seem a little too
> I didn't see them in the Encyclopedia.
advanced in their tech, almost on a level equal with VOY. Their
warp core even looked a little like Voyager's with that swirly blue
light in there. But then too they did say that they didn't really
like to go far from their home. And after this disastrous first
contact maybe they don't want anything more to do with Earthers.
- In a message dated 5/5/2003 9:50:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Not in the Star Trek world. Cloning is done routinely and prettyOr perhaps there is a taboo against cloning. On Vissia it could be that a
> easily from what I've seen. But then again, we are talking about
> an alien race here, and while they appear to be light-years ahead
> in their ship technology, we didn't get to see very much of their
> medical technology. Maybe they don't have the faintest idea how to
> clone something.
clone is considered not Vissian, since it's just a 'xerox' of an existing
Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
- Aristotle -
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]