So your religion is the religion of tolerance? Everything goes, ignoring all logic and all historical fact?

There is nothing “religious” about mentioning the historically factual person of Jesus, any more than there is something religious about mentioning the name of Martin Luther King Jr.

You cannot just ignore history and ignore truth and claim to be “enlightened” and “futuristic”. Thankfully Gene knew history and didn’t feel threatened by the truth.

Facts are facts, and truth is truth. Putting a label on the truth so you can ignore it may fool the ignorant, but it isn’t fooling anyone else. You obviously don’t understand that Jesus criticized religions even more than you do. He emphasized the fact that religion was not important. He criticized the pharisees more than anyone else.

His message freed people from the legalism of rules and regulations, and the blood sacrifices … He was the final sacrifice.

But He also said that “few would find it”. And look around today … has there ever been a time where so many are so lost, and their lives devoid of purpose and meaning? Few indeed.

Those following the broad road to destruction will be uncomfortable hearing that - and they will be the ones offended by historical truth. They will even deny logic and facts to remain living in their fear.

This was my favourite TOS episode. Gene provided the one glimmer of light to acknowledge historical truth instead of being totally fictitious. Whether in another universe or another planet (it is science fiction after all) and lends to a better story line than time travel.

Its also another good example of the poor roles they gave to women … even highly trained scientists are on staff for no reason except to fall in love with evil aliens and get the crew into trouble. Granted, they come around at the end of the episode, but one of the biggest themes of TOS throughout the series is the idea that women have to rise above their instincts to scream and act irrational to be useful … in almost every case of a strong female character, they included scenes of irrationality to highlight the “female” nature. Even Nurse Chapel, probably the strongest woman in the original show IMO, spends most of the series in puppy dog love with Spock … can anyone really imagine them using that as a theme for a male character? I can’t.

So while I agree they were better than most, they still fell short. Uhura had to show off her ass and be a secretary to make it to the bridge. M’Benga had a “decent” role, but also a very small one … he doesn’t appear in every episode. And by and large, the only place where significant number of black actors got work on Start Trek was through “Ensign Expendable” roles, security staff, and background characters. Other than Daystrom and Stone, I can’t think of another “guest star” role given to a black actor over the three year series.

I do agree with you that it was prgressive for blacks … I’m just saying that from our perspective they were pretty small steps. When we take them in the tenor of the times, they make more sense, and in many ways, its remarkable that Rodenberry got as much as he did out of the show given the difficulties he had with NBC. But I think its still worth pointing out that as great as it was for its time, it still falls short of “racial harmony.” And, the way they treat women in general throughout the show is pretty regressive … even main female characters like Uhura were prone to fits of screaming in a dangerous situation … would have been very nice to see at least ONE “Tasha Yar” type character in the original series. I still feel that as progressive as they were, they fell short in most areas where they strove for egalitarianism. We can write that off to the times it was produced in, but I still think its worth doing the analysis of what went right, and what went wrong.

Thanks again for the comment … very thoughtful

Let’s start with Uhura herself. OK, so you can make the argument she was a glorified secretary, and that just enforced the gender stereotype of women being fit only for clerical jobs.

However, that stereotype only applied to *white* women; black women on television in the 1960s weren’t even white collar workers; they were usually maids or washer women, and almost always “uppity” comic relief - a stereotype that would hold fast well into the 1970s, probably best exemplified by Maude’s maid, Florida. So even as a “space secretary,” Uhura was head and shoulders above her TV contemporaries, and would remain so far at least another decade.

Black men fared better that you’re giving “Star Trek” credit for, too, Commodore Stone, Kirk’s superior in “Court Martial,” is a black man. Richard Daystrom, the “father of the duotronic computer” from “The Ultimate Computer” is a black man. The Enterprise’s other surgeon, Dr. M’Benga, who appeared in multiple episodes during the show’s third season run, is a black man.

It’s worth pointing out in both M’Benga and Uhura’s case that these aren’t just blacks, they’re *Africans* - show me one program on prime time television today with a single recurring African character and I’ll eat my hat.

I agree with you about Star Trek’s unfortunate tendency to pander to Christianity, however. It’s even more obnoxious in “Who Mourns for Adonis?” where Kirk tells Apollo that the reason humans don’t need gods anymore is because “We find the One most sufficient.”

On the other hand, when you consider that NBC would airbrush Spock’s ears in promotional materials because they were afraid he looked “too satanic” for their audience, it’s not hard to understand why Christians were tossed an occasional bone.

Thanks for the comment

Of course it is. Do you propose that to have any value, a thing must transcend its environment? Certainly, something can be progressive within its time. Progress is dialectical, as we know.

Otherwise, you are measuring against an absolute, and everything falls short.

ST isn’t the alpha and the omega. It was simply a decent and interesting show in a golden age of television. Judge it on those grounds.