The most confused morals in Star Trek (and other scifi)

[CharlesPhipps]

That reminds me of the Voyager race that reanimates the dead to replace their numbers but alters their DNA in the process. The Voyager crew are so weirded out by it, they banish their former friend and crew member to live with them because cultural differences can't be overcome you know!

Mentioning the Kobali (that's the species name) in any of the Star Trek Online community will result in a ton of people cursing them as evil as hell. It's so weird how strongly people feel about them sometime.

Well, they're graverobbers, kidnappers, and brainwashers.

[Worffan101]

That reminds me of the Voyager race that reanimates the dead to replace their numbers but alters their DNA in the process. The Voyager crew are so weirded out by it, they banish their former friend and crew member to live with them because cultural differences can't be overcome you know!

Mentioning the Kobali (that's the species name) in any of the Star Trek Online community will result in a ton of people cursing them as evil as hell. It's so weird how strongly people feel about them sometime.

STO people hate them because they force people to take part in their reproduction (tantamount to rape), brainwash people, and force them to stay Kobali whether they like it or not. Also, they repeatedly refuse to negotiate in good faith and keep hiding critical information from the heroes, and act really, really sanctimonious about it.

Think the worst possible combination of Gul Dukat and season 1 Picard.

[CharlesPhipps]

They're also refusing to give up the cryopods of living members of the Snake Nazis.

Which sounds like a metal band.

Now, I'm no friend to Snake Nazis but that is a really important thing to add.

[Beastro]

"The Drumhead" didn't have a bad moral, but I think it was badly delivered. Picard at the end asks if they've grown so fearful that having Romulan ancestry disqualifies someone from Starfleet, which ignores that the man lied on his application.

This after Picard has personally cleared the man of all wrong-doing on the grounds that he had tea with him. If Picard had next tested if the guy weighed more than a duck it wouldn't have surprised me in the least.

IMO< it further cements Chuck's idea that Wolf 359 was the Feds 9/11 moment that broke away all this silly idealistic rust off of the nation.

[Worffan101]

They're also refusing to give up the cryopods of living members of the Snake Nazis.

Which sounds like a metal band.

Now, I'm no friend to Snake Nazis but that is a really important thing to add.

It's HEAVILY implied that they're murdering Vaadwaur who are in stasis and using them as breeding stock. One mission involves the Vaads inoculating themselves against the Kobali reproduction virus, and the player is supposed to stop them. Stop them from protecting themselves from space zombie rape.

That plus the Kobali sanctimonious hypocrisy outrages the fans a LOT.

[CharlesPhipps]

I've decided they're SPACE COMMUNISTS to the Vaadwaur's Space Nazis.

[AllanO]

"Dragon's Teeth," hands down. It's even worse than "Dear Doctor", in that it's a deliberate endorsement of not just eugenics through inaction but direct, active genocide. These people were warlike some centuries ago, so they deserve to be wiped out, nuked from orbit, every last man, woman, and child. Voyager even sends the coordinates of the capsules containing the children so the attackers can blow them up.

Its not just there past conduct, Voyager was willing to help them until they attacked Voyager for the high crime of not supplying photon torpedoes.

Also, as I recall all the pods are together along with there attack ships etc. Note obeying the rules of war does not mean making human shields super effective, if there is a legitimate military target (like say ships armed with particle beams) you can target it even if you know some non-combatants etc. will be caught in the crossfire. For example if you blow up a TNG era federation ship (other than the Defiant or a shuttle craft etc.) children also get blown up, that does not make every race that has ever attacked a federation ship guilty of war crimes.

The "good" new is some of their ships escaped the planetary bombardment. So the genocide was not completed. Judging from their interactions with Voyager those escapees probably went on to instigate all new genocides though and I guess you will complain about those also...

"The Drumhead" didn't have a bad moral, but I think it was badly delivered. Picard at the end asks if they've grown so fearful that having Romulan ancestry disqualifies someone from Starfleet, which ignores that the man lied on his application.

This after Picard has personally cleared the man of all wrong-doing on the grounds that he had tea with him.

Except he did not clear the man of all wrong doing he said he admitted to lying on the application. The implication is that normally would not justify kicking someone out of Star Fleet and indeed no one is trying to kick him out for that rather they are trying to construct a treason case around him based on innuendo etc. Picard denies that that fact he lied on an application is indicative of the guy being a traitor involved in some part of some larger plot. Its like saying if someone jay walks we must suspect them of drunk driving.

That also had the point of letting the entire system collapse into withdrawal by not helping. Which, yes, is probably a good thing but was a huge decision by itself to do for "someone else's good."

Inaction is a decision too.

I don't think Prime Directive morals deny that inaction is a decision rather they are saying. Inaction is the only justifiable decision. Which is still wrong, but not for the reasons you suggest. Also you still get debates about which inaction is the best decision...
---

On the theme of thread it is very minor in the grand scheme, still confused. I remember someone pointing out that in Lessons has Picard's possible girlfriend has to take a transfer because he can't bring himself to order her into risky situations (he can't handle it, so she needs to transfer, I would say unfair). I think this is why real militaries have rules against fraternization between the ranks and real non-military organizations have codes of conduct about how relationships can be handled to try and avoid these sorts of conflicts of interest. Its not so much the dilemma as the way it is so breezily handled as if Star Fleet never has this kind of problem and there would be no need for regulations around it, no principle of ethics or fairness are at play etc. When presumably this kind of thing would be happening all the time and there would be guidelines and things in place to deal with it. I guess it is one of those things humans evolved beyond...

[CharlesPhipps]

I think the assumption is that Star Trek is a lot more loose about these things because ships are expected to be military bases rather than just militaries. As such, they have people who have relationships and families because they're years long missions.

Which is something that has been criticized by some people in the age old, "Why does the Enterprise have families?"

[Darth Wedgius]

"The Drumhead" didn't have a bad moral, but I think it was badly delivered. Picard at the end asks if they've grown so fearful that having Romulan ancestry disqualifies someone from Starfleet, which ignores that the man lied on his application.

This after Picard has personally cleared the man of all wrong-doing on the grounds that he had tea with him.

Except he did not clear the man of all wrong doing he said he admitted to lying on the application. The implication is that normally would not justify kicking someone out of Star Fleet and indeed no one is trying to kick him out for that rather they are trying to construct a treason case around him based on innuendo etc. Picard denies that that fact he lied on an application is indicative of the guy being a traitor involved in some part of some larger plot. Its like saying if someone jay walks we must suspect them of drunk driving.

Picard's statement was:

A trial based on insinuation and innuendo. Nothing substantive offered against Mister Tarses, much less proven. Mister Tarses' grandfather is Romulan, and for that reason his career now stands in ruins. Have we become so fearful? Have we become so cowardly that we must extinguish a man because he carries the blood of a current enemy?

It could be that the implication was that that the initial fraud would not have been enough to ruin Tarses, but it does contradict the literal interpretation. Picard's speechifying, not writing a computer program, so you can consider a bunch of things are being left unspoken. I wasn't feeling that charitable after the "I've talked with him" line (which I misremembered as mentioning tea) and trying to retcon Troi's empathic abilities as "intuition."

[Cassandra]

Trek's overarching narrative is uncomfortably pro-intervention if examined through a non-American, or even non-western, lens. A large portion of Trek is about the mostly human protagonists solving other peoples' problems. The implication is that it is humanity's duty to take care of the rest of the Trek galaxy as it is unable to take care of itself. This is rather troublesome given that Trek is more-or-less intended to be America-in-space as metaphor for the real Earth. In that context, Trek's message that interventions are virtually always good things comes off as somewhat jingoistic.