"I will not abandon this planet to that woman." - Picard (emphasis his)

Can we spell Prime Directive. It was an internal Ventaxian matter.

Imagine, if "Ardra" had just let the Enterprize go, she would have goten the planet and Picard would have been on his way. After all, when Jared began defering to her Picard began dealing with her as the governing body of the planet.

And about Ardra's powers, she "was" using standard technology, how did she disable the internal comunication system and door for Picards quarters? The rest of the ship was obviously unaffected, otherwise someone would have noticed.

These are the voyages of the starship "Enterprize". It's ongoing mission- to boldly win more awards than any other Trek series ever!

Can we spell Prime Directive. It was an internal Ventaxian matter.

I think that there were Federation hostages on the planet when she arrived. She ordered them released and the people holding them complied. At this point Picard tried to leave but Ardra would not let them saying she now owned the Enterprise. This is why Picard had to neogitiate. It's true that if she left the Enterprise alone that they would have left and she would have ended up with full control over the planet.

As to why the Federation was even there , I have no idea. They didn't seem to be warp capable.

Also, Picard followed the precise rules of vintaxian law. He didn't impose Earth rules on these people, and if somehow this had been Ardra he probably would have let it go. He felt that it was a con-artist and he knew leaving would be like leaving a planet in the hands of any evil alien who means to do harm. I think someone needs to read up on the prime directive

Was this story based on The Devil and Daniel Webster?

My digital TV guide tells me that this story was based on a script for the never produced "Star Trek II" series. However, it was obviously "inspired" by The Devil and Daniel Webster.

The Child is yet another "Star Trek II" script. Instead of Troi, it was Ilia who had the kid.

My digital TV guide tells me that this story was based on a script for the never produced "Star Trek II" series. However, it was obviously "inspired" by The Devil and Daniel Webster.

It can be both, the Star Trek: Phase II ep was inspired by The Devil and Daniel Webster; but since it was naver produced the ep was re-written for TNG.

Picard sends Worf down to the Transporter room to get Dr. Clarke and bring him up to the Bridge. Does Picard really need to waste time by having Dr. Clarke wait for someone to come down and get him? Aren't there any closer Security personnel who could escort Dr. Clarke to the Bridge, instead? Also, and most importantly, the Enterprise is orbiting a planet where the people are going wild with fear and where there has already been a hostage situation. Is this the best time to send your Tactical Officer away from the Bridge?

On page 272 of the NextGen Guide II, Phil is confused about Ardra turning into Fek'lhr, when Kang in Classic Trek said Klingons have no devil. The problem is, how do you define devil?
In Earth history some warring peoples would take the other people's gods and make them devils. It is also common to take mythological and legendary characters with `jobs' similar to the Christian devil and assume that they are a devil too. Because the Greek God Pluto was lord of the underworld and ruled Hades, the land of the dead, some people mistakenly assume he was the equivalent of the Devil and use Hades as a synonym for Hell.
Fek'lhr's job description is "Guardian of Gre'thor, where the dishonored go when they die." Which basically means that Fek'lhr is just a mythological prison warden. Some might see that as being synonymous with the Christian Devil ruling Hell, but the Christian Devil also tempts people into committing the sins which send them to Hell.
So how do we know that Fek'lhr didn't tempt warriors into dishonoring themselves? Worf's statement in a Deep Space Nine episode (I think it was Paradise Lost)
Major Kira is talking about the Prophets and she asks Worf about the Klingon Gods. Worf says the Klingon Gods are dead, killed by Klingon Warriors who found them to be too much trouble. By and of itself, this statement is not a problem, but then we have Fek'lhr. True, O'Brien's next statement leads one to believe that Klingons occasionally say things to confuse non-Klingons, but it sounds like a myth that a warrior race might make up to bolster their fighting skills. So what was it about Fek'lhr that the ancient Klingon Warriors let him live? If he was the Klingon Devil he would certainly cause more trouble than a Klingon God and probably be first on the Klingon hit list, but apparently he was left alive, so Klingons probably do not see him as a devil.
And if Fek'lhr did tempt warriors into being dishonorable he would almost certainly be top of the hit list. So how do we know that the ancient Klingon Warriors left Fek'lhr alive? The look of fear on Worf's face when Ardra turns into Fek'lhr and the fact that at no point in this episode did Worf ever mention ancient Klingon warriors killing Fek'lhr. As mythological characters go, Klingons probably look on Fek'lhr as a good thing since he deals with the dishonored warriors and is probably used to scare Klingon children into fighting fairly. (Klingon mother to child, "Moogu, don't you stab Gipan in the back like a coward! Face him and rip his heart out like a man!")

Data credits P. T. Barnum with the expression, "There's a sucker born every minute." According to an interview I watched years ago, the expression came from a newspaper article and was preceded by "As my friend P. T. Barnum might have said,". (Not an exact quote, I don't have the book that the author was hawking.)

While those windows in Picard's room have an impressive view, what about privacy? If another ship is flying next to the Enterprise, can the people just look right in? Hmmm, maybe this is how Ardra knew which room was Picard's?

I liked the music in this episode. It was reminiscent of classic Trek.

There was a reference to the "Western Magnetic Pole" which is interesting since I don't remember ever hearing of magnets having a west or east pole. I suppose they could call it that because the axis of rotation is called the North and South poles and one end of the magnetic poles is west of the city, or maybe Ventax II just happens to have more than one magnetic pole?

The Ventaxian guards were not in the room when Ardra was revealed as a fake and were summoned when Jarod pushed a button. How did they know why they were summoned and why weren't they still afraid of Ardra?

While those windows in Picard's room have an impressive view, what about privacy? If another ship is flying next to the Enterprise, can the people just look right in? Hmmm, maybe this is how Ardra knew which room was Picard's?

That would be like trying to tell which office in a sky scraper belonged to a particular person from a block down, these ships are huge and don't exactly sit 20 feet away from one another.

The Ventaxians made a deal with the devil to stop wars, clean up the environment, etc.? Why didn't they make a deal with God to do that? All that nice peace-and-environment stuff sounds like something God would approve of, not the devil.

Picard asks the Ventaxians about it and they admit they did the work themselves, Ardra didn't actually do it. So why do they credit Ardra with anything? It sounded like they were expecting the devil to do something then admitted the devil didn't actually do anything. It's been a while; maybe I missed something.

They made a deal with Ardra because Ardra was the one who appeared to them and offered them that deal.

I think the reason Jared continues to believe the Ardra was responsible was intended as a metaphor for the way religious fanatics/Biblical literalists today answer questions about how the Bible can be literally true in spite of all the scientific evidence that it cannot be: They simply say "God makes it possible," or "God works in mysterious ways," or "God made so that it looks that way." Jared probably believes that Ardra "made" it possible for the people to do what they did to clean up their act.

At one point, Ardra describes Troi as "Someone in a Starfleet uniform, but unobtainable." IMHO, Troi fits neither description, especialy the one about the uniform.

Yet another "religion is bad" episode. So much for I.D.I.C. in the 24th century.

If you will notice carefully in the trial scene, Ardra wears a blue dress. Possibly a reference to the song "Devil in a Blue Dress".

I agree with CCabe's nit about Troi being "unobtainable"...seeing how Troi KISSED Picard in "Family"

MISSING SONG: "Devil Woman" by Cliff Richard.

Thank goodness for that.

What exactly did convince Picard that Ardra was a fraud when she first showed up?

He read the scpipt

Mostly likely.

But seriously though, he bet his soul on the fact she was a fraud. That was risky given he had NOTHING to go on. Especially in the Trek Universe, that has beings like Q, Trelane's race, Apollo and the other Greek gods,...so why was he so sure that Ardra wasn't real.

Because there is no real god. All of those beings were merely highly evolved and powerful alien beings, not gods.

This is to prevent this becomming like the Religion Boards.

Because they were not real gods. All of those beings were merely highly evolved and powerful alien beings, not gods.

You are a savage John Spartan!

It's Lenina, not Leanna. Sheesh. You get a knock-out stick to the head.

*boing*

Rene: What exactly did convince Picard that Ardra was a fraud when she first showed up?
Luigi Novi: It's part of the basic secular humanistic premise of Trek. In Trek, particularly among humans, religion has mostly died out, and there is no such thing as the spirituality, magic, or the supernatural. Everything is believed by humans to have scientific explanation in this universe.

You people aren't understanding my point. How did Picard know that Ardra wasn't a powerful alien being, like Q, Trelane, Apollo, etc? Picard took a huge gamble when he had NOTHING to go on.

How did he know that Ardra wasn't an alien from a powerful alien race with a long life span who really did help the planet on the condition that the planet became hers a thousand years later?

As for your comments, Luigi, I have problems believing that. I don't understand how that could be true when Roddenberry allowed references to Jesus Christ and "the One [God]" in TOS.

I think Rene's got a point there. My best guesses would be intuition, judge of character, and the absence of totally inexplicable phenomena (such as Q's 'chain link' barrier in space).

Picard does seem to be jumping to conclusions, though, and it seems reckless to bet his soul. Even if Ardra is fake, what if he can't prove it? Once the hearing starts, he seems to have little strategy until Geordi solves the riddle.

For the last point, could Roddenberry's beliefs have changed between TOS and TNG?

I think Roddenberry had to reign some things in during TOS- he had an integrated cast in terms of both race and gender, imagine if these characters had been totally atheistic!

As for your comments, Luigi, I have problems believing that. I don't understand how that could be true when Roddenberry allowed references to Jesus Christ and "the One [God]" in TOS.

Also that was the kind of thing the network censors would not have liked. Imagine if Kirk's line had been "Human's have no need for Gods." and it was not followed by "we find the one sufficant." Religious folks would have raised hell because that would have implyed that humans of the 23rd century don't believe in or have no need for religion.

Rene: How did Picard know that Ardra wasn't a powerful alien being, like Q, Trelane, Apollo, etc?
Luigi Novi: Ah. I see what you mean, Rene. Good point.

Rene: As for your comments, Luigi, I have problems believing that. I don't understand how that could be true when Roddenberry allowed references to Jesus Christ and "the One [God]" in TOS.

Brian Fitzgerald: Religious folks would have raised hell because that would have implyed that humans of the 23rd century don't believe in or have no need for religion.
Luigi Novi: But that's pretty much what Roddenberry envisioned. Were there inconsistencies? Sure. I don't know for a fact how to explain them, except to speculate, as Brian said, that network censors had something to do with it, or that perhaps Roddenberry didn't scrutinize every single line of dialogue in his scripts.

All five captains either stated outright that they didn't believe in gods or have any religious beliefs, or make vague comments about keeping an open mind or having "things" that they believe in. The one exception was Sisko, who experienced a conversion in Rapture(DS9)--and that was part of that series' premise--and even then it was made clear that the Prophets were simply aliens that were viewed as Gods.

There are other references in numerous episodes that indicate what the Trekkian future view is in general towards religion, even if there are some exceptions here and there.

Well, while any sort of "Human" god is constantly being frowned upon, isn't it interesting how other cultures' deities seem to exist? Or at least aren't denied quite as vehemently. I'm thinking of episodes like "Emanations," "Leap of Faith," "Barge of the Dead," or "Justice."

Now, in the Bajorans' case, how exactly would you define Gods? The Prophets certainly function as Gods to the Bajorans (and Sisko), so I don't think you can say that their Gods are just "wormhole aliens" when they exist!

Emanations didn't make any mention of Vhnori gods, just their afterlife. The "god" in Justice was clearly shown to be, like the Bajoran Prophets, aliens who may have once been mortal but evolved to a higher plane, and their "ship" appeared to be technological.

There's no Trek episode named "Leap of Faith."

Sparrow: ...so I don't think you can say that their Gods are just "wormhole aliens" when they exist!
Luigi Novi: What does one have to do with the other? What does the question of their existence have to do with whether they're viewed as aliens or gods? Of course they exist. They're noncorporeal aliens. Humans, Cardassians, Ferengi, etc., see them as such. Bajorans see them in a supernatural context.

Emanations didn't make any mention of Vhnori gods, just their afterlife.Luigi Novi

Ah, good point. Well, okay, perhaps my point might be expanded to say that Human concepts of the afterlife generally don't pan out, but other species' do.

There's no Trek episode named "Leap of Faith." Luigi Novi

There isn't? That's surprising. You'd expect there to be... Okay, I goofed. I was referring to "Sacred Ground."

What does one have to do with the other? What does the question of their existence have to do with whether they're viewed as aliens or gods? Of course they exist. They're noncorporeal aliens. Humans, Cardassians, Ferengi, etc., see them as such. Bajorans see them in a supernatural context. also, ...and even then it was made clear that the Prophets were simply aliens that were viewed as Gods.Luigi Novi

Well, what, in your definition, would define a "god"? The Prophets have never (to my knowledge) talked about evolving from some lower form of life. Indications indicate they've been around for a while. They have performed acts of creation, and they watch over Bajor. Yes, they are also life forms and as they are not human (though that might be a quibble with Sisko's ascendance to Prophethood), they are "aliens," but clearly they are also Gods. They don't have to be seen as one or the other.

About the Prophets, there has to be some explanation for their "We're of Bajor" statement. Some episodes of DS9 have Kira stating that dead Bajorans are "walking with the Prophets".

Sparrow, I just didn't understand why you implied a correlation between gods vs. aliens and existence vs. nonexistence. Why are they gods if they "exist," but "just aliens" otherwise? I just didn't see what you were getting at there, Sparrow.

Sparrow: Well, what, in your definition, would define a "god"?
Luigi Novi: A powerful being whose existence is viewed in a supernatural/magical/divine context.

Sparrow: Indications indicate they've been around for a while.
Luigi Novi: Again, why does that mean that they're not aliens? Where is it said that aliens are beings who've only been around a short time. The Q have supposedly been around a long time.

Sparrow: They have performed acts of creation..
Luigi Novi: Which acts would that be?

Sparrow: ..and they watch over Bajor.
Luigi Novi: Again, the Q watch over Bajor. Many other powerful noncorporeal entites "watch over" their domain in Trek.

Sparrow:they are "aliens," but clearly they are also Gods. They don't have to be seen as one or the other.
Luigi Novi: But the notion that they are Gods is simply a context in which the Bajorans view them. That they are gods is a question of cultural viewpoint, rather than an empirical classification distinct from "alien."

I mean to say the Q watch over the universe.

Part of Ardra's lingerie looks like alt-Marlena Moreau's lingerie from "Mirror, Mirror"

NANJAO: This episode vaguely reminds me of "Catspaw" (TOS)

What ever became of Marta Dubois- the actress who played Ardra? She was hot! Would love to know what she looks like without the goop on her face.

The Ventaxian guards were not in the room when Ardra was revealed as a fake and were summoned when Jarod pushed a button. How did they know why they were summoned and why weren't they still afraid of Ardra?

We only saw him pushing the button he might have simply said "Hold Ardra- she's a fraud"
It is revealed that Ardra is using tricks of the transporter and holoemitters at the end to fake her magic, but how does she not only beam off an ensign but come back in a perfectly fitting uniform????
For that matter, where do these people go when they disappear (which BTW includes Picard).

'For that matter, where do these people go when they disappear (which BTW includes Picard)'

Transporter buffer?

One thing I noticed while watching this ep tonight...at the beginning of the ep where Picard & Co. are in the Conference Room discussing the hostage situation, Picard says that he wants Worf, Geordi, Data, and himself to beam down, and then he asks Troi to "come as well". Once they beam down, there's only Worf, Data, Picard, and Troi - what happened to Geordi?

I have not seen the episode in a while. But according to the copy of the script in my TNG Companion CD-ROM, Picard only asks Data and Worf (and later Troi) to accompany him to the surface.

I just checked. He doesn't mention Geordi.

As I read this conversation, I had a thought about how Ardra's deal could have worked. A thousand years earlier, a member of a benevolent alien species by the name of Ardra (or something like that) visited Ventax II. She decided the locals had potential and made them an offer. She gave them a combination of advice and technlogy that would let them address their planet's difficulties, telling them that in about a thousand years they could become part of an alliance of which her race was a part. That group could have ceased to exist in the centuries after that time. Also, the Ventaxians may have continued to tell the story of Ardra, and over the years it somehow got garbled (by accident or design) to the point that they think she was a demonic being coming to enslave them. It accounts for the elements of the story and puts a rational origin onto them. It would have been interesting if Picard had heard the Ventaxian story and connected it to some ancient civilization he learned about from Professor Galen. Then the story could have been about him wanting to nail this slatternly trickster to the wall for misusing the noble study of archaeology for her own cruel ends. That would have given Picard a personal reason to want to defeat her.

I think it was wrong of Sheena Easton to try to kidnap the Valtrexians.

NANJAO: As we know, Picard quotes a lot of historical figures. In this episode he says, "Goodness had nothing to do with it"...that is a quote from Mae West.

Just to add my 2 cents in here on a couple of things.

1) Fek'lir vs. the Devil: Here's the problem: "devil" is too general a term. Fek'lir can be in current Klingon thought, and the phrase "Klingons have no devil" can both be true. It all depends on how you define devil. To many people the term devil, as in a certain religion's devil can be very general, and can refer to any deity which has some aspect that is percieved to be in common with Satan. (Used as a term for the Christian devil (or "for the devil in teh christian tradition" for those who would prefer the terminology as such) to avoid confusion.)

Let's look at the Greek tradition. Let's take Hades for example. There are some parallels to the christian Satan. 1) He is depicted as living underground. (As commonly thought) 2) He rules a place which is inhabited by the evil dead. (Tartarus compared to Hell) 3) He does not judge the dead, they are assigned to him. There are other differences 1) He cannot be described as any more evil than the other Greek deities. 2) He also holds sway over the places of the good, noble, or heroic dead (Field of Shades, Elysian Fields, and Isle of Spirits Blessed respectively, yes, 1 and 3 are bad translations of the Greek, but that is how they are most commonly known. Let's put those differences aside for the moment. Could he be considered a Greek devil? Perhaps, he is subterranian and involved with teh evil dead. Is he parallel to hte christian Satan? No.

Thus, Fek'lir is, from descriptions in the episode, more a Hades type figure. He guards the land where the evil (in Klingon terms "dishonored") dead go. But he is not a "Klingon devil" in the idea that he is a tempter, accuser, or opposer. Fek'lir does not seem to have any stake in making Klingons become dishonorable. He just keeps 'em there once they are. Thus, in one sense, he is a Klingon devil, and perhaps, to someone like Ardra, making a culture survey, he could be considered a Klingon devil. But in the origional series, to the apparently Christian (in some form) Kirk, the proper response owuld be the Klingons have no devil, in the sense that they do not have a being in thier beliefs that is the equivalent of the devil (i.e. Satan) in Kirk's religion. (I'm assuming the quote being used is from the TOS episode "Day of the Dove."

Ahh, the universal translator, which seems not to be 100% in it's translations. Certainly "warrior" seems to mean something differnet ot humans (fighter or soldier) than to Klingons (seems something more along the lines of "samurai" or "strong, honorable person".

Now, can all the humans (Or all the Federation/Starfleet humans) atheist or agnostic? I don't think we can make this statement. In the same way that the series can get quite overboard in anti-religion episodes ("Who Watches the Watchers" probably being the most obvious, actually to the point of becoming painfully clunky in spots.), I think that the viewer, critics and nitpickers (that's us, on all three in most cases) can be just as quick to overreach in declaring such.

(Please note, I am most familiar with TOS, TNG, and DS9, I am much less familiar with VOY and not at all familiar with Enterprise, so I will restrict my comments to the first three.)

Now, let's see, so far we can't really be sure of most of the crew. Let's take stock of what we have from both series. Captains first. . .from his own statements, Kirk seems to be at least somewhat Christian, Picard seems to be (as far as I can tell) agnostic bordering on atheist. Who else can we be sure of? One in TOS, two in TNG, two (mostly) in DS9. Spock is very heavily Vulcan, and the Vulcan culture seems to be more philosophically based in it's beliefs than deisticly based. Data does not seem to have really gotten into that part of human culure yet, but from his pattern with everything else, he seems likely to pick and chose bits of each. Worf seems to be at a fairly devout follower of the Klingon religion. Keiko O'Brien seems to go atheist in DS9, but her wedding in TOS seems at least partially traditionally bhuddist. Quark (and other Ferengi) seem to be into a philosophic/enlightment religion. (see below)

Otherwise, what can we be sure of. Let's go with humans only, to make it simple. Do we really ever have a good guess at the religions of the other crewmen? LaForge? Barclay? Riker? Miles O'brien? Crusher? Nope. Any or all of them could be, for all we know, Christian, atheist, agnostic, Jewish, Neo-Pagan, Muslim, Bhuddist, or anything else. They could all be devout, lapsed, only slightly religious, or whatever. Why don't we see it? Because there really is no reason why we would. For all we know, Barclay could be an extremely devout fundamentalist protestant. But there really hasn't be a place where it would come into play in the series. The Prophets were an important plot device in DS9. The Klingon religion, like a lot of other Klingon cluture was explored a lot in TNG. But the Klingon culture was something new being explored. How much would we really get from watching FaForge go to church?

Now, as far as Worf saying that the Klingon warriors killed thier gods. This obiviously seems false because of both Fek'lir and Kahless. Kahless seems to in some aspects fit the mould of a culture-hero type character, but in others he seems like more of a god/chosen one figure. Again, I blame the UNiversal Translator. It seems like a logical followthrough from the Klingon culture that there would be a divine overthrow of a previous power, much like (again, in teh Greek tradition) the Olympian gods overthrowing the TItans. Perhaps Kahless, Fek'lir and others overthrough an older either tyrranical or dishonorable previous divine order. Or Fek'lir could have been neutral in the war between the gods and the warriors and Kahless. Just an opinion, but it seems to make sense in Klingon culture.

Gee, I'm longwinded.

Pentalarc

For this explanation to work, Kang would've had to be familiar with the details of the Christian devil, which I would find a bit surprising (though not by any means a nit, or anything).

I don't see how Fek'lir or Kahless contradict the notions of Fek'lir and Kahless, since Kahless was a proven historical figure who left artifacts behind, rather than simply a mythical figure for whom there are no artifacts, like Brahma or Jesus. As far as the killing of their gods, Barge of the Dead(VOY) made clear that Kortar killed the gods and as punishment, was sentenced to navigate the Barge, much like Anubis in the Egyptian religion (though the description Sto-vo-kor seems to resemble the Valhalla of the Norse Viking religion).

What indications were there that Kirk was at all Christian?

NANJAN: This is one of the scripts originally written for "Star Trek Phase II". Others include "The Child" and "In Thy Image" (which became ST-TMP).

Though I dislike 'religion is bad' episodes (tell the truth it's the only thing about Trek as a whole I dislike) I don't think this one has a negative message: it's important to unmask false deities or other figures who use deception to deceive masses into obeying their will (Jeez, that sounded almost Marxist - scary!)

I'm going to steal a bit of MikeC's thunder here: Marta DuBois was in a few "Magnum, P.I." episodes as Magnum's ex-wife Michelle.

What is wrong with "religion is bad" episodes? Just because you may dislike them, that does not make them bad episodes. There are FAR worse things on television than episodes like this!

Sure is a good thing no one ever scanned Ardra with a tricorder.

Or instruct the transporter room to beam her 2 kilometers off the starbord bow instead of down to the planet's surface.

Or shot her with a Phaser for that matter:

Picard: Mr. Worf, Stop her.
Worf: *ZAP*
Picard: huh! didnt see that coming, I figured you would walk around in a lesurly pace and give her time to stun you somehow.
Worf: sorry Sir, I acted practially, wont happen again
Picard: *looks at her face down on the floor* well I guess she is not some advanced Q like being. Take her to the brig.

"What indications were there that Kirk was at all Christian?" - Luigi
Well, I think it's statements such as "Humans don't need gods; we find the one to be quite sufficient." (Was there a second one? I don't recall.) Regardless, I don't think that's enough- belief in a single God- to assume that Kirk is a Christian- merely implied as a non-atheist.

"What is wrong with "religion is bad" episodes? Just because you may dislike them, that does not make them bad episodes. There are FAR worse things on television than episodes like this!" - Mr Crusher

It's bad because, frankly, it's insulting. Episodes like Who Watches The Watchers that suggest that all religion is due to ignorance of science, or "Chosen Realm" that says that religion is violent and inevitably the cause of conflict are denigrating and deeply offensive to the millions of peaceful, educated, intelligent people that haven't gone and started any wars because of their faith, who don't believe in God because they think the stars in the sky are beads of the ancient elders or some sort of mythological hoo-haw, but simply choose to believe that there is more to existence than what we, as simple 21st century humans, have learned so far. It's taking something deeply held to many people and saying not "It's a problem when religion causes X..." or "Religion can be misused as X" but simply "Religion is bad and no good can come of it and all it's practitioners are ignorant and violent." It's saying not that there can be bad elements of faith when misused (fair enough- there were Crusades, after all) or even that a religion exercised without discernment can be dangerous (fair enough, there are cults after all, that bilk people into believing in dangerous thanks), but instead says that believing in anything (but yourself, I suppose :-) ) is foolish. Which is insulting and more than a little arrogant until tv writers can gain the sum of all knowledge and be conclusively sure that there is nothing unknown to believe in. :-) It's also a little short-sighted considering all of the charities, orphanages, hospitals, etc. have come from people of faith excercising their belief; which is why a view of faith stating 'no good has ever and can ever come of it and we'll all be better off once that crutch is shed' is just a little bit unfair and one-sided- not to mention, again, insulting. There's a difference between saying 'faith is not for me' or 'I don't agree with those beliefs' and saying 'faith is only a problem that needs to be resolved and it's practitioners are fools,' which the average TNG episode tends to favor. (Ironically, later Treks like DS9 and VOY have tended to reverse that rend, with episodes like Sacred Ground suggesting that there may be more to existence than science can explain... though ENT seemed to veer decidedly back into TNG territory. The Ex Astra Scientia website has an excellent analysis of the religious leanings/viewpoints of the various Trek series here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/inconsistencies/religion.htm Interestingly, while TNG is the most Atheistic, the TOS movies are the most pro-faith.)

"I don't think this one has a negative message: it's important to unmask false deities or other figures who use deception to deceive masses into obeying their will" - Thande
Well heck, that's practically right out of Revelations! ;-)

Who Watches the Watchers never mentions science. For the most part, it appears to me to be an examination of fanaticism can begin. Admittedly, the one scene I think may reveal an anti-religion attitude on the part of its writers (accurately or inadvertently) is the scene in which Picard describes the society to which the Mintakans would revert if they imposed a rule book upon them.

Chosen Realm(ENT) similarly seemed to depict fanaticism, and not all religion.

Nowhere in those episodes do I recall anyone making references to "all" practitioners of religion.

In general, however, even if there are some episodes that appear to be "religion is bad" episodes (and I don't necessarily disagree that there are--Roddenberry was a secular humanist, and Leonard Nimoy asserted that he was anti-religion), I don't see why that has to be insulting. If one point of view states that "religion is bad", what's wrong with exploring that idea. Sacred Ground(VOY) seemed to be a "maybe faith is good" episode, and Cold Front(ENT) seemed to advocate keeping an open mind with respect to God/gods, but I wasn't insulted by those.

In a similar vein, Dead Man Walking and Incredible Hulk #380 were "the death penalty is wrong" stories, but I wasn't "insulted" by them, even though I'm very much pro-death penalty. They were excellent stories, and I can evaluate them on that basis, even if I don't share the underlying viewpoint that informs them.

In any event, to each their own.

Luigi,

It is possible that Who Watches the Watchers was more about fanaticism. I really got the impression that it, and other episodes, like Justice, ascribed to more of the 'religion in all forms is bad because it leads to trouble.' Likewise, for Chosen Realm- well, I'll quote Ex Astra Scientia directly:
"But in two or maybe more remarks throughout the episode, Archer explicitly blames the faith for D'Jamat's misdeeds. Not inflexibility or fanaticism, but the very basic idea of their religion. We are supposed to believe him, witnessing how Archer is right about everything else and how D'Jamat is evil all over (he even claims to be merciful when he says he would kill only one crew member for the crime of desecration). The outcome of the episode is that, instead of keeping a bit of a controversy, we are readily served a preconception that any religion will ultimately end up in conceit and in discrimination of "heretics". While there is some truth in that stance regarding the history of Christianity and Islam, neither religion is based on intolerance or hatred. It is actually quite the contrary, and only ruthless leaders have misused faith for their own purposes. Millions or even billions of religious but peaceful human beings prove that there is nothing intrinsically wrong about their religion. D'Jamat repeatedly makes silly claims that his "truth" should be the only one, but Archer's stance that there must not be anything besides science is not really that much better. Only that it is easy to show you're right when someone points a phase pistol at your head."

That may not be the intent. It may be trying to talk solely on fanaticism. But that's not the way that I, at least, perceived it. And in that case, it is insulting, because it seems to be putting forth a viewpoint that having an open mind about/believing in anything by faith is categorically bad, and leads to dangerous or ignorant results. To me, that's fundamentally insulting because it's calling myself, my family, and a large portion of my friends foolish for admitting that there's more to life than we know right now (which to me, it seems foolish to deny!)

I understand your point about exploring alternative viewpoints (and for the record, I agree with you on the death penalty). Perhaps I'm not looking at the episodes objectively. I just get irked by the almost-condescending nature of the dialogue at points; it often seems like they're treating my beliefs and way of life like a disease to eventually be cured or an error humanity may generally recover from; which I think would be insulting to anyone- after all, they'd dare not (nor would they want to, of course) make such statements against homosexuals, because that would be highly insulting to them and we've already seen what kind of outcry that viewpoint brings. The Trek writers generally respect homosexuals too much to insult them with that kind of implication. It would just be nice if they respected people of faith in the same way.

But then, sometimes, with episodes in TOS, DS9, and VOY, sometimes they do... it seems that TNG- and some, but as you mentioned, not all, sections of ENT are particularly intolerant among the Trek canon.

And where does the concept of "all" come from? Is there anything in the episode that could only be interpreted as such, because it can't be interpreted any other way? Or is it simply derived from the personal aesthetics/bias of the viewer? If multiple possibilities exist, how does one conclude that one in particular is the right one, and exclude the others?

Ex Astris Scientia did not write the episode, nor is it reporting the intent of the writers. It is expressing its own interpretation, just as you're doing, so you're using one interpretation as "evidence" that another one is correct. That quote asserts that Archer makes an assertion about the basic idea of their religion, but you didn't provide the quotes that illustrate this. And even if he felt this way about their religion, that's not the same thing as all or any religion. Any insistence of "all" or "any" seems to come from your own mind, and the mind of the EAS writer who wrote that review. (I could be wrong, though.) In Cold Front, when the pilgrim asked him his opinion about God, Archer good-naturedly said he kept an "open mind".

And yeah, like you alluded to, episodes' treatment of religion will vary according to which writer writes them.

I'm not trying to make an empirical statement of writer's intent, Luigi. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, but that is how I interpret the episodes (in this case, because I happen to agree with EAS's interpretation- I wasn't citing it as evidence, simply expressing it because they put my opinion on the episode better than I thought I could have.) which is why such episodes are insulting to me. And, I presume (and yes, I am just presuming) why it is offensive to others of faith that express a dislike for it. (I don't know about Thande in particular, mind you). I wasn't trying to claim an authoritative stance on writer's intent or it's meaning- just to clarify my opinion and why I consider the messages offered- as I interpret the intent- insulting. That may not be the intent in the first place, true- that's why it's only my opinion. :-)

Okay, but "interpret", I thought you were referring to the writers' intent. I get what you're saying; You're saying that irrespective of what they intended, that's the way it "came off". I hear ya.

Right, exactly.

GREAT MOMENT:

The expression on Data's face when Picard uses Ardra's technology to turn into "Fek'Lhr" is priceless.

As for Ardra's interpetation of Earth's Devil, I suppose it was pretty accurate. After all, Mephisto, the main Hell-Lord on Earth in the Marvel Universe, looks a lot like "the Devil" in this episode.

But as I have said on the Comic Books board, Mephisto has complete control over a "Realm of Hell", but he is not the "Devil" of traditional Judeo-Christian belief.

As for Fek'Lhr, it has been said many times: he is NOT the Klingon's Devil! In TOS's "Day Of The Dove", Kang said that their race did not have a Devil. Fek'Lhr is merely the "Guardian of Gre'Thor", where dishonered Klingons go to die.

And in that respect, Sto-Vo-Kor is where honorable Klingons go. So, is that to be considered the equivalent of Heaven, or in the Viking's case, Valhalla?

I don't know. That would take a better theologian than me!

Picard says to Data "You'd make a fine judge." Maybe Data could get his own TV judge show. Just think..."Judge Data". Well, if Ed Koch and Jerry Springer can have their own judge shows...

I'd rather see Judge Bob Wheeler. ;-)