Prime Directive?

[Niemz]

If an entire planet were going to be destroyed, would you violate the Prime Directive to save them?

A starship stood by and watched as the loss of a planet's atmosphere was about to wipe out the last remaining members of a primitive civilization, rather than interfere to save their lives (TNG episode "Homeward"). However, the Federation observer refused to stand by, and violated the Prime Directive by saving a small group of that civilization.

[Decind]

I would try to save them. I can be a big softie.

[brenn]

Rules are made to be broken.

[Capt Kat]

Yes I'd break the rules,and save them. And well,I also wouldn't be a doofus like Picard. I would have let Q join my crew then I could order him to fix the problem.
But every civilization has the right to grow,learn,make mistakes,live. What kind of people would we be or person would I be if I had the chance to save lives but didn't take it when I had all the stuff that was needed to do so just because of the rules. There are times when it is nessacary to listen and follow the rules,but other times...the book needs to be thrown out the air lock. Besides,what about the children? Shouldn't they be aloud to grow up?

[brenn]

The Prime Directive is a stupid rule anyways. Just by being in space or showing our selves on planet we our interfering in an alien cultures evolution.

[Niemz]

I believe they have to remain out of view of a planets inhabitants...

[brenn]

And that works so well. Which is why I think the directive is nonsense.

[earthcrusher]

If I acted in accordance to what I beleive then yes I would save them. But since society is cramming natural selection and the THEORY of evolution down my throat Id say screw it they were naturally selected to become extinct!

[Mr. Atoz]

What do you mean by "cramming" the theory of evolution down your throat? It happens to be the only thing remotely resembling a scientific theory that we have!

And how can you say the Prime Directive is nonsense? How long have you been watching Star Trek?

[Niemz]

So would you break the Prime Directive?

[earthcrusher]

atoz said:

What do you mean by "cramming" the theory of evolution down your throat? It happens to be the only thing remotely resembling a scientific theory that we have!

And how can you say the Prime Directive is nonsense? How long have you been watching Star Trek?

It is a scientific THEORY not a scientific FACT but to each their own.
It seems to me that more people put alot more stock in the Sci Fi world than in reality. This is just my opinion, everyone has one. I guess I am looking at it as a matter of faith. Alot of people including myself ( and not just the Christian religion) have faith that their lives have meaning and we will continue on through the hands of someone or something greater than ourselves. And some have faith that there is no one above them and we evolved from animals so being an animal they have no one to answer to so they can do whatever they will. Just a simple opinion. ((shrug))

[Mr. Atoz]

Mr. Earthcrusher, with all respect to your religious views, naturalists also believe that their lives have meaning, and that there are structures of society which are larger and more important than ourselves (things worth dying for, in other words). I fail to see what your diatribe has to do with "putting more stock in the Sci Fi sorld than in reality" whatever that is supposed to mean. Or with accepting the scientific FACT of evolution, for that matter.

[Mr. Atoz]

The Prime Directive is there for a d**n good reason,and we all know it. What if one of our ships traveled back through a timeloop and found itself in the middle of the Spanish Inquisition? The captain could easily conclude that religion was a destructive influence, couldn't he? Would he be justified in interfering, of stamping out the Christian religion, because he believed that in the long run, mankind would be better off? Of course not.

That said, Terry Pratchett once said that rules exist so that you think really, really hard before you break them. There are undoubtedly situations in which the Prime Directive could be side-stepped, as we've see both Kirk and Picard do on occasion. But that's not the same as saying it's "nonsense".

[earthcrusher]

atoz said:

Mr. Earthcrusher, with all respect to your religious views, naturalists also believe that their lives have meaning, and that there are structures of society which are larger and more important than ourselves (things worth dying for, in other words). I fail to see what your diatribe has to do with "putting more stock in the Sci Fi sorld than in reality" whatever that is supposed to mean. Or with accepting the scientific FACT of evolution, for that matter.

Prove to me that evolution is a SCIENTIFIC FACT.

[earthcrusher]

atoz said:

The Prime Directive is there for a d**n good reason,and we all know it. What if one of our ships traveled back through a timeloop and found itself in the middle of the Spanish Inquisition? The captain could easily conclude that religion was a destructive influence, couldn't he? Would he be justified in interfering, of stamping out the Christian religion, because he believed that in the long run, mankind would be better off? Of course not.

That said, Terry Pratchett once said that rules exist so that you think really, really hard before you break them. There are undoubtedly situations in which the Prime Directive could be side-stepped, as we've see both Kirk and Picard do on occasion. But that's not the same as saying it's "nonsense".

The chances of one of our ships traveling back in time is very , very, very, slim. If it ever becomes a reality ( which I am not denying ) in our lifetime, I will discuss this with you.