Continuing Stargate

[s09119]

It depends on your morals. While I may not share the same morals as many of the members here, here's what I found morally wrong about it (not even including my opinion that it detracted from the episode flow wise); of course all of this is IMO-
*Having sex out of wedlock is immoral. But I'm not going to make too big of a noise about that.
*Something like sex ought to be kept between the two consenting partners, and not out there for the whole world to see. If we really wanted to watch people 'have it off' as you say, we'll go to the internet where there's plenty of it.

Not to nitpick, but it's 2AM and I'm overtired:

1. Intercourse was around long before the concept of marriage was created, so I've never understood why people insist it's immoral...
2. You never saw anything graphic; at most, you learned that Lt. Scott like boxerbriefs. Besides, I thought the scene very clearly illustrated that this take-charge character we were introduced to in the opening scene isn't really that mature or ready for the responsibilities dumped on him.

All IMO, of course.

[Jeffala]

at most, you learned that Lt. Scott like boxerbriefs.

And that it doesn't take long for him to lose his enthusiasm, as it were, for the deed after being admonished.

[AVFan]

Even still, my biggest problem with it is that it just didn't fit in with the episode. Like a lot of other people said, it was out of place. I agree with you s09, it was quickly established that he was in over his head when Young handed him responsibility.

[Lt. Col. Mcoy]

Not to nitpick, but it's 2AM and I'm overtired:

1. Intercourse was around long before the concept of marriage was created, so I've never understood why people insist it's immoral...

Intercourse was not around before marriage. When God created Adam and Eve, he gave them in marriage immediately. No intercourse took place for quite a while after, from what we can tell. Now, inevitably someone is going to start arguing theology with me. If that happens, I will post a link to a suitable thread.

I hate to do this on your thread, but you really should have thought about it before you said something like this around me.

2. You never saw anything graphic; at most, you learned that Lt. Scott like boxerbriefs. Besides, I thought the scene very clearly illustrated that this take-charge character we were introduced to in the opening scene isn't really that mature or ready for the responsibilities dumped on him.

A television show is by definition graphic. But I know what you meant, and I disagree. I (perhaps) would have been fine with them showing the people walking into a room and closing the door behind them, rest implied, but to actually show the beginning of their private coitus and to display them in the act of undressing is quite a step too far. Honestly, what possible advantage has their scene over mine, except to arouse the hormones of young teens? Not to mention my extreme aversion to having people pretend to have intercourse. If one must commit adultery (not that I am in any way defending it), surely one should have the decency to do it for real, instead of faking it out to show the world.

[Guest750]

Intercourse was not around before marriage. When God created Adam and Eve, he gave them in marriage immediately. No intercourse took place for quite a while after, from what we can tell. Now, inevitably someone is going to start arguing theology with me. If that happens, I will post a link to a suitable thread.

I hate to do this on your thread, but you really should have thought about it before you said something like this around me.

So you believe the Bible is literal? Well then you're ****ed. That means your against insest and yet God only created Adam and Eve.

[Jeffala]

Yeah. Okay. I'm checking out of this discussion now. It's always hard to argue a point of early human (/proto-human) history when someone starts to conflate it with religion.

[boeli]

Yeah. Okay. I'm checking out of this discussion now. It's always hard to argue a point of early human (/proto-human) history when someone starts to conflate it with religion.

i agree with you on this one. I hate it when people start using the bible to make their own oppinions valid, believe in it as much as you want but dont bother me with it.

[SG-18]

alright. way too much stuff happening now what with the religious connotations an such being through in to the fray.

so9, do us a favor and post an episode to get everyones minds off of this scene.

or better yet, what did everyone think of the soundtrack? I really liked the violin piece with the shots of destiny.

[bradly08]

Religion does have its ups, (gives people hope, when their is none ect) and I have no problem against people following religion; The only problem is when they try and force you to beilve in it, Their are people who refuse to beilve that pie is 3.141592654 ect. because in the bible its is stated as 3. Also their are others refuse to beilve that the earth is over 6,000 years old even though the evidence is staring them right in the face. Lt. Col. Mcoy, im not trying to get into an arguement about religion, im simply saying that their are other ways of looking at the world than through the eyes of religion.

[Lt. Col. Mcoy]

So you believe the Bible is literal? Well then you're ****ed. That means your against insest and yet God only created Adam and Eve.

Well, did I not call it? It's rather amusing that you find the need to attack me personally.

Yeah. Okay. I'm checking out of this discussion now. It's always hard to argue a point of early human (/proto-human) history when someone starts to conflate it with religion.

By all means, I have no wish to drag you into this if you want to be left out. Although perhaps a less provocative final statement is in order for someone who wishes to avoid a discussion, hm?

i agree with you on this one. I hate it when people start using the bible to make their own oppinions valid, believe in it as much as you want but dont bother me with it.

Well, that is quite an interesting thought. I believe I shall. Though again, if you have no interest, why respond?

Religion does have its ups, (gives people hope, when their is none ect) and I have no problem against people following religion; The only problem is when they try and force you to beilve in it, Their are people who refuse to beilve that pie is 3.141592654 ect. because in the bible its is stated as 3. Also their are others refuse to beilve that the earth is over 6,000 years old even though the evidence is staring them right in the face. Lt. Col. Mcoy, im not trying to get into an arguement about religion, im simply saying that their are other ways of looking at the world than through the eyes of religion.

Ah, fascinating. I respect you for giving the most reasonable response (though I am confounded as to your comment about pi). Come, if you truly wish to get into this with me, I invite you to this thread. (Of course, others may join as well if you wish, but do be polite and rational.)


By all means though, let's heed SG-18's excellent advice and not wreck this thread. I'd certainly not want to scare off s09119!

[Dr. Daedalus]

Intercourse was not around before marriage. When God created Adam and Eve, he gave them in marriage immediately. No intercourse took place for quite a while after, from what we can tell. Now, inevitably someone is going to start arguing theology with me. If that happens, I will post a link to a suitable thread.

I hate to do this on your thread, but you really should have thought about it before you said something like this around me.



A television show is by definition graphic. But I know what you meant, and I disagree. I (perhaps) would have been fine with them showing the people walking into a room and closing the door behind them, rest implied, but to actually show the beginning of their private coitus and to display them in the act of undressing is quite a step too far. Honestly, what possible advantage has their scene over mine, except to arouse the hormones of young teens? Not to mention my extreme aversion to having people pretend to have intercourse. If one must commit adultery (not that I am in any way defending it), surely one should have the decency to do it for real, instead of faking it out to show the world.

I agree with you 100% McCoy.

Dr. D

[Dr. Daedalus]

By all means though, let's heed SG-18's excellent advice and not wreck this thread. I'd certainly not want to scare off s09119!

Dr. D

[s09119]

Ooooooooookay, and the thread-creator is calling a time-out on the religious conversation...

Let's try and keep the conversation within the limits of Stargate; until I post an episode dealing with Adam and Eve, they're not on the table

[Lt. Col. Mcoy]

Well said.

[Crazy Tom]

Gentlemen, you would not be so quick to attack McKoy if you knew him better, however, having said that, I was under the impression the Adam/Eve creation story was a total metaphor.