• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

Did I say that being atheist makes you ignorant? No I did not. Read my post again. I was merely guessing that elmachango was EITHER atheist OR ignorant, due to the obvious strong anti born-of-the-egg position given. I followed on by making the point that regardless of this, the comments made showed symptoms of severe tunnel vision.

You are quite correct, being atheist does not necessarily make you ignorant. However, making rediculous judgements on others beliefs does.
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

Just to play the devil's advocate here, should parents have the power of life and death over their children just because they ARE their children?

Not all societies would see it that way. If a parent were to starve their child to death, that parent (I hope) would be prosecuted. Even if that parent had a firm belief that starvation was the only way to rid the child of a "demon".

So, can/should life-saving medical care be denied someone who happens to be born into a family that doesn't believe in life-saving medical care?

It's a complicated issue, and has been for as long as medical care has existed. Don't try to oversimplify the situation by name-calling.
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

Don't try to oversimplify the situation by name-calling
Click to expand...

... as opposed to over-complicating the situation by playing devil's advocate?

I believe that regardless of any moral or ethical dilemma you present here, it is comforting to know that others who do not share the same beliefs would have something to say, or try to get involved somehow. In fact, differences in opinion / religion are very important, as it constantly prompts us to think about our actions as opposed to instinctively proceeding with them.

However, like in the situation with Franklin, if an issue has been raised, and an impartial second opinion has been fairly given, you have to draw the line somewhere. Sometimes you need courage to change the things you *can* change, serenity to leave alone the things you cannot, and wisdom to know the difference.
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

There are so many variables here. Imagine a settlement of Amish farmers, who don't usually use any modern technology. Imagine a child form the settlement has a terrible seizure. Imagine that the horse and buggy can't get him to help fast enough. Are the parents guilty of murder for not having a car?

There are still places in India where widows are expected to join their husbands on the funeral pyres. Female circumcision is widely practiced in many areas. If we truly believe in cultural relativity, how can we condemn these things?

We come back to "civilized" behavior being in the eye of the beholder. Is there really a soul or spirit within us? How can we know for sure? And what of peoples we meet from other worlds? Science can never know everything, that's no secret. It wasn't that long ago in the scheme of things that educated Europeans believed the earth was flat; and that the heavens revolved around it. How do we know that, a few hundred years from now, what we know as "fact" now won't be considered as silly as a flat earth?

So maybe, just maybe, the kids' parents could take one look at the "cured" boy and immediately see his soul was gone. Couldn't Delenn immediately see Morden was touched by the Shadows?

And maybe, even if there was no soul to escape, the fact these people believed there was a soul in their son is enough.

Should the parents be responsible for the boy? I think so. If we can't trust kids to eat their vegetables, how can we trust them with mature decision making? Little kids literally do not have mature brains, and someone does have to look out for them. These parents are mature, responsible, and raising their son according to their beliefs. It's obvious they love the boy.

Comparing the fate of Kosh and this boy is not the same thing. If Kosh died, the very powerful Vorlon people would have been very upset with Babylon 5, Earth, etc. Kosh's death might have brought on events that would have made the Earth Minbari War look like a tea party. The death of this boy, while terrible, doesn't have that immediate import on the galaxy.

Franklin refuses to consider the possibility that he could be wrong, and it blows up in his face. Should he have lost his job? I think so. Does he learn anything? I'm not sure.

[spoiler]His arrogance and his "I have to be in charge of everything" attitude are what lead to his drug problem.[/spoiler]

What really makes this episode is Sinclair. Just imagine how different the episode would have been if Sheridan had been in command of the station.
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

How do we know that, a few hundred years from now, what we know as "fact" now won't be considered as silly as a flat earth?
Click to expand...

Hey, what's this now? As a Flat Earth Socieity member, I simply must say that this ridiculous notion of a round Earth is just really getting out of hand.

/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

The earth isn't round, silly. It's a sphere.

/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

(I've seen pictures.)
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

The earth isn't round, silly. It's a sphere. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
.
.
(I've seen pictures.)
Click to expand...

Oh, right. You mean the ones taken during those phony Moon landings? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Of course we're all tempted to say that Franklin was "right" because we tend to share his beliefs. Even assuming the soul exists, we don't believe that a simple surgical procedure is going to let it "leak out". So of course these silly (and fictional) aliens and their silly (fictional) religion are wrong.

And it is precisely that certainty of our own rectitude that the episode wants to make us question. Objectively speaking, how can we prove that either is correct? You can't offer positive proof that the soul does not exist. If there is such a thing, and a God to lay down laws about its nature, how do we know the parents are wrong? Franklin's instruments cannot detect the soul either way. Given that different religions exist, it may be that God has, in fact, laid down different rules for different groups and species. Maybe Human souls don't escape during surgery, but Shon's would have. There are religions right here on Earth that draw a distinction between the mind/personality and the soul. Shon himself may not have been able to detect the absence of his.

I'm not saying that any of this is true, only that to a genuinely objective observer, neither side is necessarily right. It ultimately comes down to belief. And neither belief is inherently more "correct" than the other.

Which is kinda the point.

It would be easy to construct a similar conundrum in which something we all tend to believe in was being questioned, and it isn't terribly clear that the pro-Franklin arguments advanced here couldn't equally be used attack that belief. A lot of this stuff depends on whose ox is being gored.

Regards,

Joe
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

I'm finally back after a whole host of technical access probs!

All this talk of killing your own kids, reminds me of a well known preachers tale I've heard on a couple of occasions.

Somewhere in the US, there is a special rail bridge that raises to allow ships to or something to travel beneath the rail line.

They guy who manned the post had brought his son along for the day, and during a lull, were playing away from the track. When the signal went to indicate another train was coming, the father told his son to stay where he was while he went and changed the signals. Except the nipper didn't do that did he! As the father reached the signal box, he noticed his son wasn't where he left him but had in fact fallen into the gear system as he had run after his father. The rush hour train was coming round the bend, packed with commuters. He had time to make one decision. His son or the train pcrew and passengers. So he pulled the lever, knowing what the consequences would be. Tough call, but logically the right one... but then try telling that to your heart when it wakes you up from a nightmare at 3am every morning.

The story was used to illustrate the kind of sacrifice God made in basically letting his Son die.

I'll shut up now because I am beginning to sound like that Baptist Minister from and the Rock Cried Out No hiding Place... and I'm not even Baptist! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

This is one of those discussions that will never end because there is no "right" answer to the question.
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

Sometimes you need courage to change the things you *can* change, serenity to leave alone the things you cannot, and wisdom to know the difference.
Click to expand...

Been to AA?
(since the second 'A' stands for Anonymous, this is more a rhetorical question)


Galahad, I don't understand what your Jesus parable has to do with Believers.

Me personally, I do feel the political issue is worth as much as the purely ethical concerns of the boy. It sounds cruel, but the tenuous reputation of B5 was at stake.
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in \"Believers\"?

Yeah GKE that's why I shut up... the link was a bit tenuous I admit, purely drawing a parallel in the fact that father obviously felt that morally the right thing to do was squish his own kid, but there the similarity ends, as other lives were at stake in t'other tale!
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

Been to AA?
(since the second 'A' stands for Anonymous, this is more a rhetorical question)
Click to expand...

No ... have you?

It was a Chinese fortune cookie or something similar.
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

It was a Chinese fortune cookie or something similar.
Click to expand...

Well, wherever you first heard it, there is little doubt that it was popularlized by and is today most associated with Alcoholics Annonymous, where it is known as "The Serenity Prayer".

Records from Alcoholics Anonymous show that Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr, of the Union Theological Seminary, NYC, composed it in 1932 as the ending to a longer prayer. In 1934, Dr. Howard Robbins, the doctor’s friend & neighbor, requested permission to use that portion of the longer prayer in a compilation he was building at the time. It was published that year in Dr. Robbins’ book of prayers.

In 1939, it came to the attention of an early A.A. member who liked it so much, he brought it to Bill W., the co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous. Bill & the staff read the prayer & felt that it particularly suited the needs of AA. Cards were printed & passed around. Thus the simple little prayer became an integral part of the AA movement.
Click to expand...

Other accounts suggest that Niebuhr himself read the prayer to Bill W., who later began using it within AA. Yet another says that Niebuhr credited the prayer, or the basic idea, to an earlier compilation of prayers that he had read years before.

In any case, it is almost entirely through AA (and similar "12-step" programs based on the AA model) that the prayer has become generally known in the U.S.

The standard version runs as follows:

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

A more cynical version changes the last line to read, "And the wisdom to hide the bodies of those I had to kill because they pissed me off." /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Regards,

Joe
 
Re: Sinclair\'s last decision

A more cynical version changes the last line to read, "And the wisdom to hide the bodies of those I had to kill because they pissed me off."
Click to expand...

Hmm. Somehow, since finals begin next Wednesday, I wish I hadn't read that particular quote right now. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

"You want to know what extra credit you can do to make a 32% overall average a passing grade? Ahh, come into this dark alley with me for a moment. *gunshot sound*

/forums/images/graemlins/devil.gif

Hell, I'll have to go out an buy a gun for that. /forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

In this episode Franklin had to choose between two of the most important principles for everyone dealing with alien civilizations:"Every form of sentient life is sacred" and "Always respect the cultural and religious concepts of other races no matter how different they might be from your own".His choice was right from a human point of view but it couldn't help the boy at the end.
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

Truth_Seeker said:
In this episode Franklin had to choose between two of the most important principles for everyone dealing with alien civilizations:"Every form of sentient life is sacred" and "Always respect the cultural and religious concepts of other races no matter how different they might be from your own".His choice was right from a human point of view but it couldn't help the boy at the end.
Click to expand...

Not just alien civilizations even, alternate human paths as well. There was news just recently that some parents let their 11 year old daughter die from undiagnosed diabetes, despite the girl's demonstrating extreme symptoms for a month and other family members begging them to take the girl to the hospital, all because the parents believed they could pray the girl to health.
 
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

This thread reminds me of another difficult choice that Dr.Franklin had to make:whether to use the telepaths modified by the Shadows or disobey Sheridan's orders.Of course we know that in the army the commanding officer is responsible for his orders but Franklin could simply say "Find someone else to do that". What is your opinion about that?Did he make the right choice by sacrificing the telepaths for the liberation of Earth?
 
Last edited:
Re: Did Franklin do the right thing in "Believers"?

I don't know if there was a "right" choice, but there was sound logic to using the telepaths to help fight Clark: if they didn't liberate Earth, Franklin would most likely not ever regain access to resources needed to help free the telepaths from the Shadow technology they had been implated with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 42 (members: 0, guests: 42)

Share this page

Back
Top