You know what would really get Orson Scott Card?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Ok, I'm going to assume that the majority of people who click on this thread both think that Ender's Game is a good book, and that Orson Scott Card is a horrible person. If you disagree with that, then there are PLENTY of other threads you can use to discuss your difference of opinion. Please use those other threads.

There's a lot of talk of boycotting everything he's attached to, and that's all well and good. But you know what the internet could do that would make him mad and that is something the internet does scary-well?

Write slash fic. Write a TON of slash fic. Ship every character in every combination and permutation you can think of, so long as it's all LGBT. Ender X Bean? Go for it. Valentine X Petra? Why not? Transexual Han Tsu in a three-way relationship with Crazy Tom and Mazer Rackham? Creepy, but it'll work.

Then, send it to his fan mail, or post it on the official forums. Give it an innocent name, something that doesn't sound like you're attacking him.

Oh, and don't forget to age up the characters. The goal is to mess with HIS moral codes, not the moral codes of 99.99% of America.

Thoughts?

A lot of people who don't like OSC also don't like slash, though.

Like you said OP good books, questionable guy. But the problem is that he kind of does this in his own books as a POINT to why HE THINKS same sex relations are bad. There is always some sexual tension going on between some of the characters and I think he was trying to make everyone uncomfortable with it.

Or he has a case of denial with his own sexuality.

I doubt he'd care about some annoying fan-fiction. His income, though? People buying his work? Artists stepping back because of the boycott? His actual wallet? That he might care a bit about.
...not that this is about Card himself somehow changing his mind. He won't. It's more about publicity about Card's views and monetary suppport of NOM and the like. It's not about him so much as his audience.

Really? The best thing I could think of would be if companies he worked with pledged to spent double the amount he donates to NOM and similar groups on GLBT groups as if to say "don't worry about donating money to his crazy ideas, we'll donate twice that to the opposite."

But writing slash fiction? That's immature. Like, nine-year-old "I don't like you so I'm calling your stuff gay" immature, and in fact is homophobic in and off itself because you're using a persons sexual orientation as an insult towards a person, just in a non-typical way.

Shaoken:
Really? The best thing I could think of would be if companies he worked with pledged to spent double the amount he donates to NOM and similar groups on GLBT groups as if to say "don't worry about donating money to his crazy ideas, we'll donate twice that to the opposite."

But writing slash fiction? That's immature. Like, nine-year-old "I don't like you so I'm calling your stuff gay" immature, and in fact is homophobic in and off itself because you're using a persons sexual orientation as an insult towards a person, just in a non-typical way.

I'd still boycott his works even if they did. If DC did that, that might encourage me to buy from DC, or whatever, but I don't want to contribute to him living in luxury either way.

Why is Orson Scott Card a horrible person?
Because he doesn't like gay people? He does not promote violence, he does not use his mediums to promote anti-gay agenda's, and although his positions against homosexuality are known it's not like he's broadcasting them from his pedestal.

Any one who read his novels(and hopefully beyond Ender's Game) knows that the guy has some issues with sexuality, not to mention when it comes to children/"young adults". I won't be surprised if he's so called "quest" against homosexuality is his way of fighting his own daemons(or at least what he perceives as ones).

He's a great writer and that's it, there have been plenty of bigot actors, writers, composers and what not in history, i don't see their works being boycotted that often...

Skeleon:
I doubt he'd care about some annoying fan-fiction. His income, though? People buying his work? Artists stepping back because of the boycott? His actual wallet? That he might care a bit about.
...not that this is about Card himself somehow changing his mind. He won't. It's more about publicity about Card's views and monetary suppport of NOM and the like. It's not about him so much as his audience.

Given his economic views it is unlikely that he is at all hurting for money. A decline in revenue at this point would be at best a minor annoyance.

Had no idea he was CoLDS. Never would have thought it. Haven't read Ender's Game since I was 14.

Instead of mass trolling, how about not buying his books and not going to see the film.

ravenshrike:
Given his economic views it is unlikely that he is at all hurting for money. A decline in revenue at this point would be at best a minor annoyance.

Probably. Then again, the boycott has already had other effects (like the artist stepping back), so it's not just money that it's affecting.

No. If I write fanfic, it'll be because I like writing fanfic. If I write slash, it'll be because I like the pairing. Not because I want to troll an author I don't like, and sending fanfic to the creator is just a really horrible idea. More writers are not at least somewhat fic-friendly, personally I don't want to see that change.

If you don't like his views, DON'T BUY HIS SHIT. The man's not going to change his mind because people are sending him porn.

..Who's Orson Scott Card?

Seems an immature idea.

...but then again, the guy holds immature views on homosexuality, so it just might work. The guy apparently had people in his book Ender's Game call the alien enemy "Buggers", so his work would seem to be an outlet for his views.

And it's certainly better than retailers making the decisions of consumers for them, by denying them access to the "vote with your wallet" ballot.

I love Ender's Game and regard it as one of my favourite books of all time, and was a little bit disappointed when I later learned the sort of person the author was, but Orson Scott Card is entitled to his opinion, because as much as I dislike homophobia, I'm also extremely for freedom of speech and anti censorship, yes it might be a shitty view in my opinion, but he's entitled to his view and can express it how he likes, you may call him a bigot and rightfully so, but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things, and a part of life is dealing with people you'd rather not or who you don't agree with. Simply put things aren't so black and white, and to take a blanket approach to everything out of principal is somewhat naive and immature.

@Jamieson 90

but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things

Did anybody suggest to do that?

Skeleon:
@Jamieson 90

but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things

Did anybody suggest to do that?

Not here no, but I've heard that belief expressed elsewhere and wanted to ensure I covered it.

uncanny474:
Ok, I'm going to assume that the majority of people who click on this thread both think that Ender's Game is a good book, and that Orson Scott Card is a horrible person. If you disagree with that, then there are PLENTY of other threads you can use to discuss your difference of opinion. Please use those other threads.

There's a lot of talk of boycotting everything he's attached to, and that's all well and good. But you know what the internet could do that would make him mad and that is something the internet does scary-well?

Write slash fic. Write a TON of slash fic. Ship every character in every combination and permutation you can think of, so long as it's all LGBT. Ender X Bean? Go for it. Valentine X Petra? Why not? Transexual Han Tsu in a three-way relationship with Crazy Tom and Mazer Rackham? Creepy, but it'll work.

Then, send it to his fan mail, or post it on the official forums. Give it an innocent name, something that doesn't sound like you're attacking him.

Oh, and don't forget to age up the characters. The goal is to mess with HIS moral codes, not the moral codes of 99.99% of America.

Thoughts?

Or, you know, you could maybe respect his religious beliefs and stop trying to force your moral code on someone else, which would be just as wrong as his support for anti-gay marriage groups.

I really, really don't get this about American leftist ideology. You preach and rant and rave for the freedom of an oppressed group, then characterize another oppressed group as evil, horrible Saturday morning cartoon villains, drinking wine and petting their posh cat while hidden behind a huge leather chair. Yes, LDS members giving money or support to certain groups really isn't nice, but FFS; you can't do right by being wrong.

And yes, LDS members have faced some of the worst religious persecution in American history, and still face serious ridicule on a daily basis from half-literate punks like you who run around screaming "OMG MAGIC HAT, LOL!"

Verbatim:
Why is Orson Scott Card a horrible person?
Because he doesn't like gay people? He does not promote violence, he does not use his mediums to promote anti-gay agenda's, and although his positions against homosexuality are known it's not like he's broadcasting them from his pedestal.

He is on the board of NOM probably the most powerful anti-gay rights organization out there.

His money literally goes straight to perpetuating bigotry and legislated oppression.

Imperator_DK:
apparently had people in his book Ender's Game call the alien enemy "Buggers", so his work would seem to be an outlet for his views.

I don't think this is a very good example. Insect/Hivemind aliens are a genre staple and it is not an unknown nickname for the aforementioned staple.

I don't think it shows much in EG, and I think the arguments he makes about morality in the later books actually undermine his war on equality, but it is clear in the Alvin Maker books and the Shadow books.

You should check out Ender's Game Imperator, its a good piece of sci-fi. (And the sequel is even better!)

Jamieson 90:
you may call him a bigot and rightfully so, but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things,

I'm going to have to disagree with you to a degree here. We are talking about the rights of another individual rather than the opinions of someone. While My Card has the right to think and say what he likes, he should have have the right to actively campaign and discriminate against others. I don't know exactly what he does to support an anti gay agenda, if anything, but you cannot say it is his free speech if he wants to deny a subset of society their rights under the constitution. I don't think anyone would be backing you were Mr Card to be advocating to institute slavery again.

Hafrael:

He is on the board of NOM probably the most powerful anti-gay rights organization out there.

His money literally goes straight to perpetuating bigotry and legislated oppression.

I don't see NOM being the worst anti-gay organization, it's main activity is against same-sex marriages, although it dabbled in some other issues like adoption.
OSC is not the current president of NOM, he was one, and again i don't see how it makes him a horrible person. He has his opinions, he does not breaks the law, use violence(nor advocates for it), and as far as i can see - as gay haters go he's as civil as you can get.

P.S.
As long as social rights are not diminished, i don't see lack of gay marriages(especially their classical definition) as being a form of oppression, it might "suck" but it's not oppression.
I'm for the right of gay couple to be acknowledged as "wed" by the state, and to be able to obtain that status, but I'm against laws that will force religious institutions to wed someone under all circumstances.

Blade_125:

Jamieson 90:
you may call him a bigot and rightfully so, but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things,

I'm going to have to disagree with you to a degree here. We are talking about the rights of another individual rather than the opinions of someone. While My Card has the right to think and say what he likes, he should have have the right to actively campaign and discriminate against others. I don't know exactly what he does to support an anti gay agenda, if anything, but you cannot say it is his free speech if he wants to deny a subset of society their rights under the constitution. I don't think anyone would be backing you were Mr Card to be advocating to institute slavery again.

I'm talking about his right to express his views and opinions, not what he does by contributing money to the NOM or his other anti guy campaigns, as for the example of him bringing back slavery, he has every right to say he would like that if he believes it, as do you, I or anyone else, it doesn't mean people will back or agree with you, hell you might get a lot of flack and rightfully so, but you cannot suppress his right to say what he believes, he may be fundamentally flawed but if you start censoring people then that's a slippery slope.

Jamieson 90:

Blade_125:

Jamieson 90:
you may call him a bigot and rightfully so, but you're a bigot too if you deny his right to say those things,

I'm going to have to disagree with you to a degree here. We are talking about the rights of another individual rather than the opinions of someone. While My Card has the right to think and say what he likes, he should have have the right to actively campaign and discriminate against others. I don't know exactly what he does to support an anti gay agenda, if anything, but you cannot say it is his free speech if he wants to deny a subset of society their rights under the constitution. I don't think anyone would be backing you were Mr Card to be advocating to institute slavery again.

I'm talking about his right to express his views and opinions, not what he does by contributing money to the NOM or his other anti guy campaigns, as for the example of him bringing back slavery, he has every right to say he would like that if he believes it, as do you, I or anyone else, it doesn't mean people will back or agree with you, hell you might get a lot of flack and rightfully so, but you cannot suppress his right to say what he believes, he may be fundamentally flawed but if you start censoring people then that's a slippery slope.

I suppose since I live in Canada my view is a little different. While people are free to express their views here, there is a limit if you are promoting hate. I don't always agree with that interpretation, however I don't agree that someone can push for discrimination. I don't really disagree with what you are saying, I am only trying to point out that there are limits. A guy in Saskatchewan was trying to fight for his freedom of speech when he was putting pamphlets into peoples home with some serious anti-Semitic views. Now I wouldn't care if he wanted to say those things in his home, or to his friends, but if I get this mailed to me, or have to listen to someone ranting while I am trying to use a park? Why is my life impacted.

There are no easy answers however. I really just wish we could all respect each other fully. You do what you want and I do what I want, and so long as our wants don't conflict with each other's wants then we are free to do as we will. Peace.

I strongly disagree..

What I'm about to say is going to sound very controversial and should not be taken entirely literally, it's an enormous oversimplification which I'm indulging deliberately, but from a campaigning perspective I think it's an effective way of viewing the issue. These people have gotten very good at using pathologizing language to support their delusions, so consider this a fun little exercise in reversal.

It is best to view people like OSC not as healthy people whose beliefs stem from real experience or evidence, but as delusional people who are compulsively driven to their beliefs out of constant, pathological terror of the alternative. The walls of denial they throw up around themselves are a necessary defense mechanism against personal insecurity. They are not going to climb down or see reason because they simply cannot do so, they are driven by compulsions and fears which are beyond rational thought. If they were not, they would have long since shrugged and got over it.

You are not going to reach these people by ridiculing their views or setting out to rub the object of anxiety in their faces. They can deal with that very easily, because it's what they've been doing all their lives. Sure, you might get a second of panic out of them before they retreat deeper into their own delusions, but what does that accomplish?

You don't treat an arachnophobe by throwing tarantulas at their face, you can treat them by introducing them to the tarantula slowly and carefully in a controlled environment until they slowly realize that the thing in front of them is not the thing they fear. This will happen, in time. We live in a society where it's increasingly hard to live life genuinely apart from openly gay people. Sooner or later, reality will become impossible to avoid, and we have to trust that that moment will speak for itself. It doesn't need us to shout and scream and engage in hysterical attacks, it just needs us to keep pointing it out.

We shouldn't hate people like Card, that just proves to them that their own compulsive paranoid anxieties are true. We should pity them, and we should pity OSC in particular, because it's a tragedy that someone so insightful in many ways is nonetheless so utterly lacking in self-awareness to the point of engaging in wholesale doublethink to protect their own deluded sense of self. Learn to see the terror behind these actions, and you will increasingly see them for what they are. Small minded, petty and above all weak.

I've spent enough time raging at homophobes to know that it doesn't work. Pity, when backed up with compassion, works. Heck, it hurts a lot more too, if that's what you're interested in.

Verbatim:
Why is Orson Scott Card a horrible person?
Because he doesn't like gay people? He does not promote violence, he does not use his mediums to promote anti-gay agenda's, and although his positions against homosexuality are known it's not like he's broadcasting them from his pedestal.

Any one who read his novels(and hopefully beyond Ender's Game) knows that the guy has some issues with sexuality, not to mention when it comes to children/"young adults". I won't be surprised if he's so called "quest" against homosexuality is his way of fighting his own daemons(or at least what he perceives as ones).

He's a great writer and that's it, there have been plenty of bigot actors, writers, composers and what not in history, i don't see their works being boycotted that often...

I actually did a quick look-up of the guy. Apparently he's argued in favor of declaring "homosexual acts" a felony. He also said that if the Government allowed gay marriage he would rise up in revolution to overthrow it.

So, in a sense, he's indirectly advocating for violent repression against Homosexuals.

Witty Name Here:

Verbatim:
Why is Orson Scott Card a horrible person?
Because he doesn't like gay people? He does not promote violence, he does not use his mediums to promote anti-gay agenda's, and although his positions against homosexuality are known it's not like he's broadcasting them from his pedestal.

Any one who read his novels(and hopefully beyond Ender's Game) knows that the guy has some issues with sexuality, not to mention when it comes to children/"young adults". I won't be surprised if he's so called "quest" against homosexuality is his way of fighting his own daemons(or at least what he perceives as ones).

He's a great writer and that's it, there have been plenty of bigot actors, writers, composers and what not in history, i don't see their works being boycotted that often...

I actually did a quick look-up of the guy. Apparently he's argued in favor of declaring "homosexual acts" a felony. He also said that if the Government allowed gay marriage he would rise up in revolution to overthrow it.

So, in a sense, he's indirectly advocating for violent repression against Homosexuals.

Hmm, no he didn't - here is the original quote:

"If America becomes a place where our children are taken from us by law and forced to attend schools where they are taught that cohabitation is as good as marriage, that motherhood doesn't require a husband or father, and that homosexuality is as valid a choice as heterosexuality for their future lives, then why in the world should married people continue to accept the authority of such a government?"

"What these dictator-judges do not seem to understand is that their authority extends only as far as people choose to obey them."

"How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn."

"Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700245157/State-job-is-not-to-redefine-marriage.html

It's a tiny part of the article, and the article it self actually sates that "gay" marriage, is not the biggest threat to the "sanctimony" of marriage in his opinion.
The opinions of this guy in regards to marriage in general are strange to say the least, but i still don see what exactly makes him a "horrible" person.
He's not violent, he's not a criminal, he's a crazy Mormon that writes some god damn good stuff.
In 2003 I've actually met him during the a Scifi convention in Israel(ICON 2003), he was invited there although the Icon convention always had a strong LGBT presence, and iirc that year 2 out of the 5 main organizers were actually members of the LGBT community.
As long as he keeps his opinions in his work to him self i don't see a reason to "boycott" his work, and even if he did as long as it's legal it should not be boycotted, we still print Mein Kampf(i actually own a copy, heck it was translated into Hebrew and published in Israel), i some how doubt he'll be able to top that...

@evilthecat

"You don't treat an arachnophobe by throwing tarantulas at their face, you can treat them by introducing them to the tarantula slowly and carefully in a controlled environment until they slowly realize that the thing in front of them is not the thing they fear."

Look up "flooding" versus "systemic desensitization". To my understanding, flooding is another valid method of treating phobias. Not that this has much to do with your actual point, I guess I'm just nitpicking. And no, it's not exactly throwing a tarantula in a patient's face, but still.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flooding_%28psychology%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_desensitization

KuromaTyrant:

uncanny474:
Ok, I'm going to assume that the majority of people who click on this thread both think that Ender's Game is a good book, and that Orson Scott Card is a horrible person. If you disagree with that, then there are PLENTY of other threads you can use to discuss your difference of opinion. Please use those other threads.

There's a lot of talk of boycotting everything he's attached to, and that's all well and good. But you know what the internet could do that would make him mad and that is something the internet does scary-well?

Write slash fic. Write a TON of slash fic. Ship every character in every combination and permutation you can think of, so long as it's all LGBT. Ender X Bean? Go for it. Valentine X Petra? Why not? Transexual Han Tsu in a three-way relationship with Crazy Tom and Mazer Rackham? Creepy, but it'll work.

Then, send it to his fan mail, or post it on the official forums. Give it an innocent name, something that doesn't sound like you're attacking him.

Oh, and don't forget to age up the characters. The goal is to mess with HIS moral codes, not the moral codes of 99.99% of America.

Thoughts?

Or, you know, you could maybe respect his religious beliefs and stop trying to force your moral code on someone else, which would be just as wrong as his support for anti-gay marriage groups.

I really, really don't get this about American leftist ideology. You preach and rant and rave for the freedom of an oppressed group, then characterize another oppressed group as evil, horrible Saturday morning cartoon villains, drinking wine and petting their posh cat while hidden behind a huge leather chair. Yes, LDS members giving money or support to certain groups really isn't nice, but FFS; you can't do right by being wrong.

And yes, LDS members have faced some of the worst religious persecution in American history, and still face serious ridicule on a daily basis from half-literate punks like you who run around screaming "OMG MAGIC HAT, LOL!"

The guy didn't say anything about Mormons, he was specifically talking about Orson Scott Card, who is by no means an oppressed minority. I suspect the reason you don't understand 'American leftist ideology' is just that: you don't understand it. It's about tolerating things and people which are not harmful because there's no reason not to tolerate them. Arguably the KKK are an oppressed minority, but people don't defend them because they are violent, racist dickheads.

KuromaTyrant:

uncanny474:
Ok, I'm going to assume that the majority of people who click on this thread both think that Ender's Game is a good book, and that Orson Scott Card is a horrible person. If you disagree with that, then there are PLENTY of other threads you can use to discuss your difference of opinion. Please use those other threads.

There's a lot of talk of boycotting everything he's attached to, and that's all well and good. But you know what the internet could do that would make him mad and that is something the internet does scary-well?

Write slash fic. Write a TON of slash fic. Ship every character in every combination and permutation you can think of, so long as it's all LGBT. Ender X Bean? Go for it. Valentine X Petra? Why not? Transexual Han Tsu in a three-way relationship with Crazy Tom and Mazer Rackham? Creepy, but it'll work.

Then, send it to his fan mail, or post it on the official forums. Give it an innocent name, something that doesn't sound like you're attacking him.

Oh, and don't forget to age up the characters. The goal is to mess with HIS moral codes, not the moral codes of 99.99% of America.

Thoughts?

Or, you know, you could maybe respect his religious beliefs and stop trying to force your moral code on someone else, which would be just as wrong as his support for anti-gay marriage groups.

That's like asking someone to respect the KKK. And the appropriate answer in either case is "Fuck no". No respect for bigots. And lack of respect isn't force. You lack all perspective on what actual force is. And btw, no it wouldn't be just as wrong. It would at least have a good cause.

I really, really don't get this about American leftist ideology. You preach and rant and rave for the freedom of an oppressed group, then characterize another oppressed group as evil, horrible Saturday morning cartoon villains, drinking wine and petting their posh cat while hidden behind a huge leather chair.

They're not oppressed. And no one said they're Saturday morning cartoon villains. They're awful bigots still though for being against the rights of others. Something no one has done to them because all they get is criticism, no attempt to remove their rights. Sorry if I have no tears to shed for people getting criticized.

Yes, LDS members giving money or support to certain groups really isn't nice, but FFS; you can't do right by being wrong.

You've failed to establish anyone besides them is doing something wrong.

And yes, LDS members have faced some of the worst religious persecution in American history, and still face serious ridicule on a daily basis from half-literate punks like you who run around screaming "OMG MAGIC HAT, LOL!"

I'll shed a tear for them when they prove they deserve to exist as a church. Otherwise I'll just see it the same as the truly terrible persecution the KKK faces.

Skeleon:
Look up "flooding" versus "systemic desensitization". To my understanding, flooding is another valid method of treating phobias. Not that this has much to do with your actual point, I guess I'm just nitpicking. And no, it's not exactly throwing a tarantula in a patient's face, but still.

Yeah, I know about that.. which is why I specifically picked a really extreme example.

The reason flooding works though is that the person either can't or won't escape from the source of fear, and the fear itself is demonstrated to be irrational. For the first minute, the tarantula might seem like a terrible threat, but if it's just sat there for half an hour chilling out on your arm then it's difficult to sustain that fear.

Homophobia isn't a real phobia, which is why I said my post shouldn't be take entirely seriously. It's analogous to a phobia in its operation, but rather than being a fear of something in the environment like spiders or cars, it's a personal insecurity of some kind which makes people feel like they have to constantly defend themselves from teh ghey. That makes it different because while you can't always run away from a spider you can generally stop thinking about something quite easily.

Bombarding homophobes with gay porn doesn't challenge their fears, it simply confirms them. They see something they don't like, they close the email and they stop thinking about it. The phobia itself is completely unchallenged, in fact it's kind of affirmed. They encountered the source of fear, it bothered them so they ran away. Essentially, it's like leaving an arachophobe in an unlocked room with an extremely agitated spider and then expecting them to be cured by the process of fleeing the room screaming.

@evilthecat

"Bombarding homophobes with gay porn doesn't challenge their fears, it simply confirms them. They see something they don't like, they close the email and they stop thinking about it. The phobia itself is completely unchallenged, in fact it's kind of affirmed. They encountered the source of fear, it bothered them so they ran away. Essentially, it's like leaving an arachophobe in an unlocked room with an extremely agitated spider and then expecting them to be cured by the process of fleeing the room screaming."

Okay, I think we should stop here before the OP gets the idea from this that what we need to do is put OSC in a locked room so he can't escape and bombard him with gay porn there until he sees the error of his ways.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who got the idea that Card's homophobia is a case of 'the lady doth protest too much'. I read Ender's Game (first book) without knowing about his political views. The sexual tension between the boys simply led me to assume that he was either homosexual or liberal enough to include homosexual characters in his book. When I heard he was homophobic, I was pretty baffled.

Maybe, then, our approach should be to stage an intervention to get Mr. Card to accept his own sexuality?

Verbatim:
Why is Orson Scott Card a horrible person?
Because he doesn't like gay people? He does not promote violence, he does not use his mediums to promote anti-gay agenda's, and although his positions against homosexuality are known it's not like he's broadcasting them from his pedestal.

Here's a quote from 2008:

Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary. . . .

How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.

He considers enlarging the definition of marriage to be akin to dictatorship.

Verbatim:

He's a great writer and that's it, there have been plenty of bigot actors, writers, composers and what not in history, i don't see their works being boycotted that often...

And that makes it ok?

No it doesn't.

Verbatim:

The opinions of this guy in regards to marriage in general are strange to say the least, but i still don see what exactly makes him a "horrible" person.
He's not violent, he's not a criminal, he's a crazy Mormon that writes some god damn good stuff.

You're arguing: not violent/criminal = not a horrible person.

And that's fine, it's your definition, but not everyone agrees with it.

For myself: going against human rights = a horrible person.

Verbatim:

As long as he keeps his opinions in his work to him self i don't see a reason to "boycott" his work, and even if he did as long as it's legal it should not be boycotted, we still print Mein Kampf(i actually own a copy, heck it was translated into Hebrew and published in Israel), i some how doubt he'll be able to top that...

That's not really the same. The guy who wrote Mein Kampf is dead, unless the copy you're buying comes from a Nazi organization, it's merely a copy for historical review. Ie. it depends where your money goes.

A fantastically trollish idea op but I think I will pass.

Anybody who deprives themselves of reading some of the best science fiction in existence because they disagree politically with the author is a fool. I prefer to take what I want from people and not give a fuck what they think in their personal lives. I promise not to support the groups he does and will also not purchase any of his books that actively encourage people to do things that harm the harmless.

It's like refusing to see the Sistine Chapel because you disagree with the religious imagery, you're only depriving yourself.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked