Video & Photos From Gene Roddenberry’s Induction into TV Hall of Fame – Watch Seth MacFarlane’s Tribute |
jump to navigation

Video & Photos From Gene Roddenberry’s Induction into TV Hall of Fame – Watch Seth MacFarlane’s Tribute February 24, 2010

by Staff , Filed under: Celebrity,Conventions/Events/Attractions,TOS , trackback

macfarlane tv hall fameA month ago Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry was inducted into the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences TV Hall of Fame. Video from the gala event is now online, where you can see uber-Trek fan (and Family Guy creator) Seth MacFarlane giving a loving tribute to Roddenberry. Check out the video and photos below.


Gene Roddenberry Inducted into TV Hall of Fame

On January 21st the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (the same people behind the Emmys) held their 19th induction ceremony for their TV hall of fame. The Academy inducted actress Candice Bergen, designer Charles Lisanby, announcer Don Pardo, comedians Dick and Tom Smothers, game-show producer Bob Stewart and Gene Roddenberry. The ceremony was hosted by Amy Poehler.

Dick Smothers, Tom Smothers, Candice Bergen, John Shaffner, Amy Poehler, Bob Stewart, Charles Lisanby, Don Pardo and Rod Roddenberry (Mathew Imaging)

Well-known Star Trek fan and successful TV writer/producer Seth MacFarlane (Family Guy, American Dad) was chosen to give the presentation for Roddenberry, you can watch that below. In the video below, MacFarlane gives a very loving tribute to the man he calls his "hero."

After giving his tribute to Roddenberry, MacFarlane presented the honor to Gene’s son Rod Roddenberry. More info, pictures and a recap, visit

Rod Roddenberry with the Hall of Fame Award he accepted for his father, the late Gene Roddenberry. (Mathew Imaging)

Rod Roddenberry on “regular guy” dad also has a couple of videos from the event of Rod Roddenberry talking about his father and Star Trek.

Videos and photos: Academy of Television Arts and Sciences


1. G-man - February 24, 2010

Wow, teleprompter much, Amy?

Congrats, Mr. R.

2. DJT - February 24, 2010

Seth hit the nail on the head with that speech.

3. Razorgeist - February 24, 2010

What a beautiful speech from Seth.

4. Rob Westgate - February 24, 2010

Nicely done Mr. MacFarlane! When you get a chance, that nugget about “Star Trek not being about special effects, action etc, but about the people”, please pass that along to J.J. Abrams and company.

5. James Tyler - February 24, 2010

Very nicely done. Though every time I hear his voice, I just hear Brian.

6. Kosher Coder - February 24, 2010

#4 – ditto!

7. denny cranium - February 24, 2010

Maybe you should watch the whole movie. Not just the trailer.

8. GraniteTrek - February 24, 2010

Gads, Amy’s better than a sleeping pill. And just a little eye rolling at the mention of Star Trek eh?

9. Captain Dunsall - February 24, 2010

A very fitting speech.

10. Andy Patterson - February 24, 2010

Yeah, that one episode with Teri Garr..(.except she wasn’t on the ship).

11. doubting_thomas - February 24, 2010

a beautiful speech from mcfarlane, highlighting all the things that roddenberry’s star trek showed us were important, and that abrams’ star trek mocked.

12. boomer13 - February 24, 2010

Congratulations! Well deserved. Seth was hilarious.

13. TrekMD - February 24, 2010

Wow, what an appropriate speech that very well sums up what Star Trek is about…

14. MagicDan - February 24, 2010

Ah the negatives are fun. Any Star Trek is good Star Trek as far as I’m concerned. Loosen up and enjoy!

15. Schiefy - February 24, 2010

Seth hit many of the high notes about Star Trek but failed to demonstrate one of the positive aspects of Trek for me–regardless of his or Gene’s personal view of religion Trek did show great respect for a person’s (or race’s) religious views without the kind of underlying hatred evident in Mr. MacFarland’s speech. In that regard, he fails to truly honor the spirit of Trek created by Mr. Roddenberry (whether or not his personal views were closer to Mr. MacFarland’s or the one more evident in Trek).

I consider myself a part of the so-called “religious right” but would not associate myself with those personalities that have become the “straw men” of the whole movement (or “philosophical belief system”). I enjoy Trek because of many of the qualities Mr. MacFarland mentioned and were evident in Mr. Roddenberry’s vision for Trek and often find common ground there with my own supernatural, religious beliefs. DS9 (while post-Roddenberry) was a great example of how religion was acknowledged in a positive manner (while for dramatic effect many of the religious leaders always seemed to represent the worst of the Prophets–and presumably was a subtle slam against our own fallible religious leaders of today).

I am glad that Mr. Roddenberry received this great honor. Mr. MacFarland said many of the right things about him and the vision of Trek. Now, I can only hope Seth will seek to honor the spirit of Trek by showing more respect toward those he evidently strongly disagrees with.

16. NotTimothyGeithner - February 24, 2010


“I condemn false prophets, I condemn the effort to take away the power of rational decision, to drain people of their free will — and a hell of a lot of money in the bargain. Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all. For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a malfunctioning brain.” (Gene Roddenberry)

I guess Roddenberry didn’t honor the spirit of Trek either, huh?

17. boomer13 - February 24, 2010

Gene had a right also to his beliefs and that can be said to everyone of us as well.

18. somethoughts - February 24, 2010

Awesome speech Seth! Gene would have been proud. I had no idea Seth was such a big fan of Star Trek and understands it completely.

The problem with making a Star Trek movie; is that Star Trek is so deep and layered that to make a 2 hour movie that appealed to the masses, is like trying to sell sushi to everyone. I think JJ and company did quite well with ST09 despite the impossible task of selling sushi to everyone.

Star Trek will always work best on TV, and books because you can cover so many deep philosophical topics and issues, whereas in a 2 hour movie, you are forced to take on a save the earth story with a antagonist and protagonist tied in with action sequences and explosions to satisfy the average movie goer. I am sure Bob, Alex and D can pull it off but this is something that is very challenging.

19. somethoughts - February 24, 2010


Religion is a great operating system for mankind, you have to keep in mind operating systems are not compatible with one another. To each their own, you have to admit there are lots of similarities amongst all religions.

They all teach to treat each other with respect yet at the same time, so many wars has been fought over beliefs and accounts of what happened in the past or specific facts about creation etc. Live a good life, treat others like how you wish to be treated, contribute to society, replicate and pass on your knowledge to your offspring and replicate.

We are only here on this realm of existence for a very brief period of time, surely you want to have as much fun while playing in this mmo.

20. Chris Fawkes - February 24, 2010

What are you talking about. That was the precise point of the new movie and why it worked.

21. Dr. Image - February 24, 2010

Ron Moore’s theological bent showed up in DS9 and has now come into full bloom with BSG and Caprica.
It’s getting a little tiresome, frankly.

BTW, nice tribute.

22. P Technobabble - February 24, 2010

I’m a fan of Seth MacFarland, I think he’s a very funny, bright guy. Of course he’s a Star Trek fan! Nice tribute to Mr. Roddenberry.

I still maintain that JJ & Co hit the nail on the head with their movie. Thank God, Trekmovie is an equal opportunity forum, eh?

For better or worse, religion (at least what is called religion today) is as much a part of man as science, math, art, music, and so forth. None of these things are agreeable to every single human being. It’s just that human beings don’t know how to disagree without wanting to slaughter each other…

23. CSM - February 24, 2010

Bread and Circuses – Re-watch it – Portrays Christianity in a very positive light.

24. knowhathatmeans - February 24, 2010

Loved the speech, a true description of the best show on TV and also liked the nod to how soon they cancelled it! TOS deserved MANY more seasons!
I have to say though, the “gay guys” line made me squee. Possible Kirk/Spock reference, anyone?
(no offence to the anti-slashers, though, kay?)

25. Primogen - February 24, 2010

I’m an agnostic who respects other people’s religious views, and it surprises me whenever someone says (like Seth, in his otherwise wonderful speech) that Trek expressed Roddenberry’s disdain for religion, because I always thought Trek expressed respect for different cultures and ideas.

For example, in the TOS episode “Bread and Circuses”, when Uhura hears the Roman announcer trying to mock the sun worshippers, but failing. She explains, “Don’t you understand. It’s not the sun up in the sky, but the Son of God.” And Kirk replies how wonderful it would be to see it all happen over again.

The TOS Enterprise even had a chapel.

True, the general outlook of the main characters was decidedly secular humanist, but there were many instances in all the series where religion was treated with respect.

26. CarlG - February 24, 2010

@18: “…is like trying to sell sushi to everyone…”

Love this simile.

Great speech from Seth! I kind of wish he’d sang, though.;)

27. Emotionally logical - February 24, 2010

There are 11 movies, not 10 Seth LOL… j/k.. Great speech!

28. Adrick Tolliver - February 24, 2010

MacFarlane said something like “Star Trek gave us, not the murder of the week or the disease of the week, but the idea of the week.” That’s essentially why I prefer it to any other television show out there, even though its execution was often uneven.

It’s a shame that such a talented and influential writer/producer such as MacFarlane, who clearly gets the core of what Trek is about, is not actually doing the next Star Trek or Trek-type show. Instead we get Family Guy, which essentially throws out as many jokes and references as possible in the hopes that some of them will stick. Sigh.

29. LCDR Arch - February 24, 2010

No one deserves this more than the “Great Bird of the Galaxy”

30. Dr Croooow! - February 24, 2010

I’m getting tired of all the Seth MacFarlane news. Family guy is funny but somehow Seth is a big bore. I never understood how that happens.

31. nscates - February 24, 2010

Seth McFarlane is an interesting guy. I actually like his public persona better than his art – I find Family Guy mostly insipid and obvious, but in interviews I’ve seen, Seth has proven to be an intelligent and well-spoken guy. A strange dichotemy.

@28 – “It’s a shame that such a talented and influential writer/producer such as MacFarlane, who clearly gets the core of what Trek is about, is not actually doing the next Star Trek or Trek-type show. Instead we get Family Guy…”

Maybe his talents ar writing are not as grand as one might assume, if Family Guy and American Dad are any indicator. Makes me kinda glad he’s not doing any serious Trek – though I’d be interested to see his TWOK parody if Paramount would let him do it.

32. AJ - February 24, 2010

Seth’s tribute to the Great Bird is classy and funny, and to the point.

33. Pyork (JE) Productions - February 24, 2010

Don’t forget about DS9! Oh wait, too much religiosity right Seth?

34. THX-1138 of 9 - February 24, 2010

To paraphrase Miles Davis, “Is Amy Poehler necessary?” Aren’t actors supposed to AT LEAST be good at reading things with some degree of emotion?

I like Seth MacFarlane. He really seems to get Trek. He even has some love for TNG, which is a common love of mine. He get’s that it was the casualness of TNG that was what set it apart from TOS. A lot has been made of the technobabble aspect and I know that it was sometimes a bit much, but I also think that it didn’t make the show bad. At it’s core it was still Trek. It dealt with the human condition in a sci-fi setting. And it portrayed a positive future for mankind.

But I really dislike Family Guy. And I think it is a real stretch for Seth to make even joking comparisons between his show and Trek.

35. Keldor... Son of Miro - February 24, 2010

Is it just me, or does anyone else out there think that Seth MacFarland should direct a TNG movie? He clearly loves the show, and I think he would do everything to honor the series if he made a movie.

36. Future Guy - February 24, 2010


I think he would do a good job. It’s always good to have a filmmaker who is also a fan behind the camera. Otherwise, you get ST:Nemesis!

37. S. John Ross - February 24, 2010

#4 already said it, so I’ll just nod.

38. Frederick Von Fronkensteen - February 24, 2010

It’s funny, I have many Trek articles that mention little Rod as a baby and child back during the early 70’s, it’s kind of weird now seeing him grown up!

39. Will_H - February 24, 2010

Watching Seth’s speech made me realize how important it is that JJ go back to Roddenberry’s vision with the next one. Don’t get me wrong, Star Trek 09 was a good movie, a great movie, but it lacked the core of what makes a great Star Trek movie, and that was the core of Gene’s vision. I still think that can be there in a movie that has the same mass appeal that 09 did. Great speech, though, Seth, really nailed it I think.

40. The Beezer - February 24, 2010

Seth is such a hateful person… satire or not, his sudden Trek binge is really bothersom… does he even have any idea what Star Trek is about? Certainly Jean-Luc Picard didn’t go on blatantly insulting tirades just because Riker disagreed with him.

I know I know, it was a nice speech… still, I just find him to be very immature and hateful, and obviously unaware of the hypocrisy of hating people and groups whom he claims are hateful.

41. PoehlerFan20 - February 24, 2010

ummm the teleprompter should be infront of the stage, not next to it…so yeah i guess amy should look like shes reading something cos its not that subtle..unless you all have eyes on the sides of you heads cut the lady some slack. lol

nice speech, even tho have never seen star trek.

42. S. John Ross - February 24, 2010

#39: “I still think that can be there in a movie that has the same mass appeal that 09 did.”

Other movies keep proving it for them; eventually it’ll be proven, re-proven, and re-proven to the point where the suits will consider it safe.

#40: “… does he even have any idea what Star Trek is about?”

Unless someone else wrote his speech, he’s clearly got an inkling :)

43. Andy Patterson - February 24, 2010

23. CSM – February 24, 2010
Bread and Circuses – Re-watch it – Portrays Christianity in a very positive light.

And “The Ultimate Computer” makes reference to “the laws of God…and man”

44. ryanhuyton - February 24, 2010

I’d like to see Seth MacFarlane mock the character he played on “Enterprise”. Or better yet, reunite the cast of that show and do an episode in the same vain as what they did with the TNG cast.

45. RetroWarbird - February 24, 2010

Nice speech. I might not have chosen MacFarlane (He’s a satirist and naturally they tend to push buttons with people by way of celebrating the First Amendment). I like the guy fine, but he’s at least a little bit polarizing. Indeed, his initial disposition towards preferring Bones seems fitting – since Bones provided that role on the Enterprise – the guy who “said what was on his mind”, consequences be damned.

But he’s a good public speaker, and that’s what’s important. Confidence and a nice baritone voice ought to be required for speeches.

46. C.S. Lewis - February 24, 2010

It is a great shame those that despise their Creator the most are politically associated, knowingly or otherwise, with those that most wantonly destroy his creation. While it is cliche among the godless Left that “religion kills” this is, in fact, a canard. One need only look into the actual facts surrounding the greatest slaughters of history to see the common element, the rejection of Christ’s teaching:

– Robespierre and the Terror avec Madame Guillotine (he got his just dessert in the end).

– Lenin and the Bolshevik Revolution perhaps 10,000,000 murdered in all.

– Stalin is in a class by himself with perhaps 60,000,000 murders and unnatural deaths attributable to him, not including war casualties when the Soviet Union was allied with the USA and United Kingdom.

– Mao Tse Tung and more than 80,000,000 murders and unnatural deaths during his Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, not to mention their own Gulag system’s unknowable victims.

– Pol Pot and perhaps another 2,000,000 murders.

– Hilter, the ex-Roman Catholic, was one of the underachievers in the mass murder category with a mere 4 – 8,000,000 deaths attributable to him, including war casualties.

All these bloody men had one thing in common: rejection of Christianity in favor of their own will to power. The sins of the Roman Catholic church (and I speak with Huguenot blood) are de minimus in comparison and she has worked very hard in penance and restitution for historical sins against Mankind.

Further, I submit many of those that flout a fashionable disdain for “religion” are equally capable of such monstrosity, but for the circumstances and opportunity to act on their most violent impulses. If it is one’s own will that is controlling, one will do what one can when one wishes, no?

Gene Roddenberry’s “Star Trek”, indeed the fashionable atheism of many here, would be impossible except for the congenial Christianity of their host civilization, as an earlier poster alluded. The Soviet Union, Maoist China, and today’s intolerant “others” testify to this simple fact.

Once upon a time it was considered gracious to acknowledge the beneficence of a man’s host, even if he be an opponent. To mock him to his face was considered “fighting words” and the subject of “turn the other cheek” if not an invitation to duel. Sadly, that decency too has passed from our common Western virtue, cast into the same dustbin Robespierre murderously sent the Religious and Noble of France to her — and our — everlasting loss.

“Be careful what you wish, for you may get it”.

C.S. Lewis

47. Randy H. - February 24, 2010

#42 and 23 – And “Who Mourns for Adonais” mentions that humans have “outgrown” the need for gods. Don’t try and paint a religious patina on Trek because of Daystrom’s personal beliefs (who was portrayed as a wacko remember) and Kirk’s interest in an historical parallel. Roddenberry was never bashful about his distaste for imaginary friends and superstition, and to try and pretend otherwise is doing his memory a great disservice.

48. ryanhuyton - February 24, 2010


You sure are a postive guy. (Sarcasm). I think you just proved to everyone that you can ruin a thread with your trolling.

“Hitler, the ex-Roman Catholic, was one of the underachievers in the mass murder category with a mere 4 – 8,000,000 deaths attributable to him, including war casualties.”

I guess Hitler was something of a disappointment, then? Your statement is not only offensive, but proves how callous you are towards all those who died in the second World War. You owe everyone an apology.

And the rest of your post is completely inflammatory as well. You have no right blaming “leftists” for the ills of humanity. You sir just displayed ignorance and arrogance at its worst. Keep your trolling to yourself.

49. Eli - February 24, 2010

Well, ryanhuyton, it ain’t faithful Catholics supporting the act of infanticide all over the world, that’s for sure.

I too believe that Seth is a talented guy, but many of the things he does on “Family Guy” is low and easy cheap comedy. I’d love to see him actually challenge himself by producing something with more depth or of more intellectual value that he praises Roddenberry for doing.

50. Kate I - February 24, 2010

i love you seth, and you gave a really heartfelt speech about roddenberry, but cake farts? really? i don’t recommend people look that one up!! haha

51. ryanhuyton - February 24, 2010


I have nothing but respect for Catholics and other religious folks.
I did have a problem with C.S Lewis blaming secularism for the world’s ills in a blanket statement.

As for Seth MacFarlane, I agree that some of what he has done is tasteless, like the 9/11 jokes but I enjoy most of his stuff. His humor happens to polarize people. Some people like it. Some people don’t.

52. Xai - February 24, 2010

#4 and especially #37… what a poor, poor place for your opinion of the latest Trek. I cannot really fathom why you chose to again share it on THIS subject line other than you just need the attention.


On a positive note among all these strange posts

“Thanks Gene!”

53. Anthony Pascale - February 24, 2010

OK lets stop fighting over religion, even if ‘seth started it’

54. Paul Fitz - February 24, 2010

I love Seth, I love his shows, and I love what he said in his speech.

I hate the introduction of religion (either Yay or Nay) into this thread and the seeming belief that one is right and another is wrong, it diverts attention from the main fact, Gene finally got the recognition he deserves.

Congratulations Mr Roddenberry, and Thank you.

55. Jim Nightshade - February 24, 2010

It is great that Roddenberry got n deserves this honor–so do the smother brothers who were political in their humor an got their show canceled for it even tho it was an emmy winning top ten series–seth aims a bit lower but does share the bravery of taking chances for his show-i think he is funny sometimes n goes too far other times-i feel the same way bout south park–personally i think most are killed in religion for not worshipping the right god–and it would be hard to argue that almost all conquering/deaths are related to that kinda religion one way or the other–i also think gene r was tolerant of others beliefs but that most of the religion in tos was due to the times n america in the 60s n less to gene wanting the references to religion in it–deep space nines major flaw was the religious angle especially the series finale-i doubt gene r would have approved of any of it-

56. S. John Ross - February 24, 2010

#54: “Gene finally got the recognition he deserves. ”

It’s not as if he’d languished in obscurity before now :)

But yeah. One more feather in the cap never hurts.

57. GarySeven - February 24, 2010

Beautiful speech about Star Trek’s vision that has encouraged, supported, and shaped me since I was a little boy. Very moving. Thanks, Seth. In today’s world of special effects and cheap thrills, a speech that reminds us of the enduring meaning and power of Star Trek- the philosophy, the love between different people on the ship, the social commentary, needs to be said again and again. I loved the part when he said he hopes his kid loves Trek and not the Terminator. Exactly. Visions shape reality, as he said, and Trek points the way.

58. Jack - February 24, 2010

Also a Poehler fan. Doesn’t seem like she had much to work with for that 2 minute (wow) intro.

59. Adrick - February 24, 2010

Did she actually say “En-sign Rivers” in the video, or was that just my slow connection?

60. Samuel James - February 24, 2010

He was awesome. She was terrible

61. JohnWA - February 25, 2010

Gene’s views on religion are well known. To put it as delicately as possible, he wasn’t a “fan.” But it probably isn’t productive to have a theological debate with a person who couldn’t possibly say more now than when he was alive. At this juncture, he isn’t going to change his mind – for obvious reasons – no matter how persuasive the argument. And this is hardly the appropriate venue for a seance.

I would also reiterate that agreeing with Gene Roddenberry about everything isn’t a material condition for appreciating his contributions to science fiction as an artist. I certainly don’t watch Star Trek because I agree with every single creative decision Roddenberry and his successors have made. Indeed, I find many aspects of the utopian Federation very troubling. But in creating this unique world, Gene has forced me – and countless others – to think more deeply about these issues. So I am always glad to see him get the recognition he deserves.

62. doubting_thomas - February 25, 2010


it’s not hatred, it’s distain, snd it’s deserved.


what movie were you watching?


equal opportunity? i’ve had too many posts deleted just for pointing out that the movie was a shallow parody to call this place equal opportunity. “orwellian” would be a better word


respect for culture does not require respect for the stupidities of culture. religion is not an idea.

the greatest line in the original series was kirk’s response to apollo at the end, before they added a second sentence to it and ruined it.


there’s nothing hypocritical about hating people who hate others for no reason.


i don’t even know where to start with you…..


you haven’t been watching family guy closely enough, you’ve seen the surface layer of celebrity slams and fart jokes, you’ve missed the biting social commentaries and philosophical statements. you have to pay attention.


it’s completely relevant, this speech contains a comprehensive list of what defines star trek, and precisely the remake lacked

watch this get deleted.

63. Schiefy - February 25, 2010

#62–insightful comments.

Perhaps “hatred” was a bit strong and disdain the better word.

I am only concerned that “religion” or “religious people” are the object of disdain because of the few (or even many) who fail to exemplify either the teachings of Christ or the tenants of IDIC as both have much more common ground (although there are some fundamental worldview differences as well).

I do agree with one poster that even if Mr. Roddenberry was largely anti-religious Star Trek has always challenged me personally to live respectfully and congruently with my own beliefs–something I think we all want to aspire to whatever our religion or non-religion.

For that reason alone, Mr. Roddenberry deserved to be honored.

64. doubting_thomas - February 25, 2010

the main thing star trek taught is the value of truth over fantasy, even harsh truth over comforting fantasy, believing things based on their merits and not based on tradition, fear, or desire, and above all it taught the value of learning, exploration, the willingness to face whatever the universe might throw at you, to seek knowledge for it’s own sake, and to not fear it, but LOVE it.

that is where the conflict with religion is, not in what it thinks but how it thinks, or more accurately, how it does not think. it teaches belief without evidence as a virtue rather than as an act of extreme stupidity bordering on insanity. like telling somebody that the best way to drive your car is with earplugs and a blindfold. is that not deserving of distain?

65. doubting_thomas - February 25, 2010

you’ll notice the conflict with the jj abrams version which is all about destiny and faith.

66. J. Carbaugh - February 25, 2010

Religious people of every dogma and creed will always have among their ranks the one person that contributes a disservice to their faith: the hypocrite. And having spoke to my friends who subscribe to atheism, they too have a pariah they wish to disavow: the condescending, or angry, atheist.
They never fail to remind religious folk how gullible and ultimately stupid they are for believing in “bronze-age fairy tales about an invisible man in the sky”; that they need to wake up and embrace the tenets of science and reason.

So men like ‘Douting Thomas’ and Seth McFarlane look toward Star Trek as a vision of the future? This is a variation of the fairy tale that atheists believe: Mankind can achieve an utopia through science and reason. Sometimes that fairy tale purports that in order for this to happen, “superstition and religion” must be stamped out. And it’s ironic that South Park had it right in “Go God Go”, even should the atheist achieve his dream of ridding mankind of religion he will never have the utopia he desires. The Federation is a fantasy because history shows that mankind does not and will not change. Don’t get me wrong, Star Trek is a great story with characters I love and care for, but it remains just that: a story. With men like “Doubting Thomas” and Seth McFarlane– men who wish to silence those who they have disdain for, and because they can’t and NEVER will, they elect to mock them and their ideals — Star Trek will never be a reality. And by the way, I’m sure as long as we have hypocritical people of religion, Star Trek won’t come to pass either. Tolerance with these men, as I’ve discovered of their ilk, is only extended to those who share similar beliefs.

This isn’t extended toward all atheists. Listen, I understand if someone makes a claim regarding a deity and they present no proof of its existence, then you have a right to be skeptical. I get it. I understand your doubt. When I have a revelatory experience with God, I know better than try to use that as proof of God’s existence with my friends who happen to be atheist. I can’t duplicate that experience in a controlled environment, but that experience also leaves me with a comforting TRUTH. God exists for me and that God is Jesus Christ. But with many atheists there is a “live and let live” attitude and wish to work with all people to build a better tomorrow. Let’s try together to build that better tomorrow, shall we?

67. GarySeven - February 25, 2010

Doesn’t anybody listen to Anthony anymore?
(Re: #53).

68. Michael - February 25, 2010

Did I notice Seth’s tribute was cut short? Was this doen during the ceremony or just for time sake on the video player service? I’d liked to have seen him presenting the award to Rod!

69. ryanhuyton - February 25, 2010

#67 no.

70. Jim Nightshade - February 25, 2010

Oh well I find varying opinions fascinating and illuminating I am always learning how others feel and react…

I think most on here respect most peoples values and opinions….

Let It Be….

And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make….

71. doubting_thomas - February 25, 2010


religious hypocrites are the ones we call “moderates”. they’re not the immediate problem. the problem is the ones who actually follow what the religion teaches, like the westboro baptists

72. Kirk's Girdle - February 26, 2010

“Bread and Circuses” did stand out as a positive religious message, which was odd in the fact that the message stated that not only was Christ real but he had taken his show on the road.

For the most part, Kirk and company spent their time rescuing stunted societies from their imprisoning dogma, whether it be religious as in “The Apple” or societal as in “Return of the Archons”. As previously mentioned, “Who Mourns for Adonais” stated that humans had outgrown their need for Gods – who were once again merely space travelers with funky gadgets.

Similarly TNG continued this condescending view of religion in “Who Watches the Watchers” in a particularly egregious moment where Picard angrily referring to the Mintakan’s religion as ridiculous superstition, and then actually finds himself worshipped by these primitive proto-Vulcan simpletons as a diety known as “The Picard.” His trying to explain that he is not a God plays like a scene from “The Life of Brian”.

And for the record, McFarland gave two much credit to Roddenberry for “Best of Both Worlds”, written by Rick (hiss) Berman and “Family”, written by Ron (frak!) Moore. Even though Robbenberry gets credit for creating venue, he was only in full charge of the first season. He missed out on the second due to the WGA writers strike in 1988, and after returning for season 3, his health had declined and forced him to turn over the reins to Berman and Michael Piller.

73. Kirk's Girdle - February 26, 2010

Make that “too much”. I’m a big believer in the edit function.

74. Rob Westgate - February 27, 2010

@7,20,52 I think…

Get off your high horses folks. I am allowed to have an opinion as much as the next person. I enjoyed the new movie, but did not love it. I particularily enjoyed the new actors and what they brought to their roles. However, I was ruminating on all the “whiz-bang” action for sake of having “whiz-bang” action. Take the ice planet scene for example. Giant, improbable monsters chase Kirk for one reason alone, “whiz-bang” action. There was some really nice interplay between Spock Prime and Kirk. In particular, when Kirk asked about his father in the other timeline. That was good stuff.

@52, is this your own personal forum? Do you know me enough to judge from a far, in the safety if internet anonimity? Is Xai your real name? I posted my opinions, with my real name, on this topic on a website that I frequently visit and very often enjoy. What a poor, poor display of tolerance for other peoples opinions, or maybe you just wanted some attention?

75. Rob Westgate - February 27, 2010

@20 Mr. Fawkes,

not trying to be a jerk here, but what social commentary did you find in the ST09. I know its a set up of new players on a new field, so social commentary was likely not top priority.

But with my post #4, I was trying to suggest that Mr. Abrams and company could spin a yarn that came with a social commentary aspect, that The Great Bird himself would be proud of.


76. doubting_thomas - February 27, 2010

jj abrams’ version was like a 2 hour army recruitment ad.

77. ryanhuyton - February 27, 2010

#76 Nah! More like a “2 hour TREKKIE recruitment ad”. :-)

78. The Chief Engineer - March 1, 2010

Go Seth!!! Completely without script… that shows real love! x

79. doubting_thomas - March 4, 2010


how? it made trekkies turn away at the door and dragged in people who would never like strar trek. it brought in the transformers audience, not the carl sagan audience

80. ryanhuyton - March 5, 2010

I meant in terms of bringing back Trekkies who skipped out on “Insurrection” and “Nemesis”.

81. doubting_thomas - March 10, 2010

those weren’t trekkies. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.