As a Trekkie I have been greatly disturbed by the activism of homosexual activists who seem to think that all of life must celebrate their depravity.
For years they have been bombarding the Star Trek franchise with demands for an openly homosexual representation in a Star Trek series, and I predicted that they would eventually get what they wanted, because of their notorious persistence. And indeed they did, when Paramount included a homosexual seen in the movie “Star Trek Beyond” that was totally unnecessary.
Surprisingly, even George Takei, who is an outspoken homosexual activist, objected to his Sulu character being made homosexual, saying that it was not Gene Roddenberry’s vision for the Sulu character. But true to his homosexual activist mind set, Takei urged the powers that be to use another character to fill the role in the homosexual display. But he was ignored.
But they did not stop there, a homosexual couple was not enough. Because you see, they want more than a symbolic cameo of homosexuality, they want celebration of homosexuality, and they want to force the public to GET OVER their squeamish disgust of homosexuality. And to force us to do so, they have determined to flood the TV and movie screens with simi-hard core homosexual expressions to desensitize us to the grossness of the act of homosexuality.
That agenda has charged full steam ahead in the new series Star Trek Discovery, Co-run by openly homosexual Bryan Fuller. This series has indeed raised the bar for homosexual infiltration into the homes of Star Trek lovers, and giving us no consideration or respect in the process. In two of the episodes the male homosexual couple lock lips in a discussing display, following many other TV and cable series that have continually forced homosexuality into the homes of viewers with no option to opt out of viewing such depravity short of avoiding the show or turning off the TV.
The WIRE.COM on 12, 2017 reported: “Discovery also features the first openly gay characters to appear on a Star Trek TV show—the ship’s doctor, Hugh Culber (Wilson Cruz), and his partner, science officer Paul Stamets (Anthony Rapp).”
This is an agenda, a homosexual agenda, and it is going to get worst.
If you doubt my warning that this is an agenda of homosexuals and their supporters, I will let Aaron Harberts convince you.
“This is something we knew we wanted to do pretty much from the minute we started breaking the arc of the entire season,” [Arron] Harberts told IndieWire. “We wanted to have this be the first chapter for this gay couple, who we plan to make one of the most important couples on our show. So, to do that, we needed to tell some tough stories to get this couple where they need to be, and to continue to expand their importance in the fabric of the show. So, this is a first step that we knew we had to take, and we weren’t afraid to take it, because we know where it’s going.” (Indiewire.com Jan. 8, 2018)
Please notice what he said concerning the homosexual couple in the Star Trek Discovery series, “we plan to make one of the most important couples on our show”. This is indeed their goal and has been for many years, to make homosexual actors and characters the most important, the most popular and the most influential. Homosexual actors (closeted and out) more and more are getting the best roles handed to them in the best movies, as a part of the homosexual agenda to normalize and indeed make homosexuality popular.
And they do so while pretending not to get our objection. In that same article it states:
“This has proven to be yet another source of controversy, with some viewers declaring that they refuse to watch a show about gay characters. It’s a stance that science fiction editor John Joseph Adams finds particularly bizarre coming from Star Trek fans. “How do you reconcile everything else that’s in Star Trek with hating somebody else because they’re different?” he says. “It just doesn’t compute.”
Science fiction author Anthony Ha agrees, noting that "Star Trek has always had a political agenda.”
As usual, they mix the issues up to confuse people about the legitimacy of our complaints. First, our objection to homosexual intrusions is not HATE, but it is always presented that way to justify their depravity as victimization, and to support their insistence that we accept them. The truth is that Star Trek’s political agenda, when moral and admirable are welcome, but when it goes beyond the political and engages in promoting perversion as wholesome, any moral person is justified in voicing objection. And their pretense not to understand our objection to the homosexual intrusion into the Star Trek franchise is just another disrespectful slight by them to our intelligence.
Sadly, there is clearly not a strong enough protest coming from people of faith and morals to concern the Star Trek leadership, and so as it stands Star Trek, as good as it is as entertainment for the most part, has gone the way of the Boy Scouts, and has now become a homosexual dominated franchise.
Sadly, there is clearly not a strong enough protest coming from people of faith and morals to concern the Star Trek leadership, and so as it stands Stat Trek, as good as it is as entertainment for the most part, has gone the way of the Boy Scouts, and has now become a homosexual dominated franchise.
Do you notice that none of the sitcoms or dramas that promote homosexuality ever include a character that presents intelligent arguments against homosexuality? Even though they claim that part of the reason for including homosexual characters is to more accurately represent the real world. Well, in the real world, there are very many people who have intelligent objections to homosexuality, and they are not bigots or “homophobes” (an invented misnomer of a word used to intimidate and shame those of us who reject homosexuality). But then, they really are not interested in reflecting the real world, only promoting homosexuality as good and normal.
I look forward to the day when Christians in the Movie industry will put their money and creativity to use in producing high quality Sci-Fi that does not feel the need to invite perversion to tell their stories.