Published: Monday, Aug. 5 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Be assured, it most certainly does run both ways. Some can't see this
though because of their own strong bias (bigotry). Some of the most hateful
comments I read in the media on this whole issue come from those promoting
"gay rights", whatever those really are. What's good for the goose
is good for the gander.
Clearly, two-way bigotry. One side utilizes the machinations of
government to deny people the constitutionally-protected fundamental right to
marry the person they love.The other side "punishes this
individual" by electing not to spend ten bucks on a movie. Yeah, these two forms of "bigotry" are 100% in the same ballpark;
Card has every right to hold and express his opinion. He does NOT have the
right to escape the consequences of holding and expressing his opinion. He is
reaping the consequences of his actions.
This whole thing just makes me want to go "huh". Government did not
invent, not create the institution of marriage. In fact, even in the most
lawless parts of the world, marriage is still an institution that permeates
diverse societies and cultures world wide. A governments "right" to
determine who marries who is tenuous at best... since the act of falling in
love, and living with a "partner" hardly requires permission from any
government. The notion that a government has the right to determine issues of
the heart are frightening at best.People "connecting" today,
to create informal "families" unfortunately has become a norm, where
living together is an accepted alternative to marriage is a much larger threat
to the family. If you want to get up in arms about an issue... it is shaking
up... not gays as the biggest issue. What gays do or don't do
has far less to do with the fall of the family then what straight people do
outside the bounds of marriage. Lets focus more on really reinforcing
families, then chasing rainbows.
I don't see it as two way bigotry so much as reaping what you sow. All
gays don't hate Orson Scott Card. But if you politicize your views
publicly then there are consequences to your "free speech," something we
all know. All gays didn't target OSC. But the extreme element did,
and those that are active in politics. They are and extreme element just as
Westboro is an extreme Christian element. Lets classify people how
they really are, and not just lay out blanket statements, Gays did this, or
Mormons did that. All Mormons are not the same. All Gays are not the same.
Lets stop acting like they are.
Homosexual,Homophobe.Yes, I guess you could call it a sort of
Two-way bigotry.BTW - I'm curious.Orson Scott
Card is Social-Economic Liberal, and has been pasted many a time here in the
Deseret News over the years for his opinions..How is it
conservatives rally behind him on this issue, yet beat him to a pulp on
all the others?
"Card writing in 1990, “Laws against homosexual behavior should remain
on the books, not to be indiscriminately enforced against anyone who happens to
be caught violating them, but to be used when necessary to send a clear message
that those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior
cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that
society.”"In the Mormon Times in 2009, he wrote,
“Married people attempting to raise children with the hope that they, in
turn, will be reproductively successful, have every reason to oppose the
normalization of homosexual unions.”How is Card "hurt"
personally and individually by same-sex marriage? Card has had a
public platform to express his views to deny basic rights as defined in the
Supreme Court's decision in Loving v.Virginia stating that to deny the
"fundamental freedom" of marriage "on so unsupportable a basis"
as race "is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty
without due process of law."Therefore, others may use a public
platform in an attempt to deny Card financial benefits.
Card does not have a right to my money. I have the right to spend that money how
I see fit and using any criteria that I choose. If I choose to "punish
him" economically and financially for his bigoted views, that is my right to
not spend money on his product. That is the free market that you conservative
folks are always blathering about.
Card's personal views stopped being personal when he joined NOM's
board of directors. His views stopped being personal when he wrote articles,
spoke publicly, and contributed money to fight the legalization of gay marriage.
He chose to be public about his views, and the public has a right to choose
whether or not they attend a movie based on one of his novels.
So when conservatives speak their minds and try to live their beliefs,
they're brave patriots defending freedom. When liberals do the same,
they're a bunch of bigots who want to squash personal expression and are
anti-God to boot.Duly noted.
It is kind of hard for the side that has the rights the other side wants to
claim they are the victims of bigotry.It's like a slave owner
telling his slaves they need to be respectful and tolerant of views that he
should be allowed to own other human beings.If you want to fight
against same-sex marriage, you are well within your right, but you have lost the
moral high ground to play the victim card.
The solution is simple. Boycott every business where people with whom you
disagree work. Tell those business owners that you will take your business
elsewhere.Orson Scott Card has the right to say anything that he
wants to say. Those who disagree with him have every right to boycott. But, it
is ludicrous to think that 3% of the population would not think of the damage to
themselves and to their cause when they make threats about an individual. Let's do the math. If 97% of the population boycotted every
business where people in that business held different viewpoints than their own,
who would cry "uncle" first? Orson Scott Card will not
suffer if every gay activist in America boycotts Ender's Game, but would
Hollywood survive if 97% of the population boycotted every film where a gay
activist or sympathiser produced, promotoed or starred in a movie?
" upheld the right of the individual states to define marriage. The return
of the Propostion 8 case to the lower court further upheld this decision.
"Prop 8 was ruled to not have standing and so the lower FEDERAL
courts' verdict is the one that goes through. That's not leaving it to
The system works, when the system is called "reciprocity". So if your
good to Mamma, she'll be good to you. Intention matter.
Midvaliean: "All gays didn't target OSC. But the extreme element did,
and those that are active in politics. They are and extreme element just as
Westboro is an extreme Christian element."And I suppose that the
gay community at large thinks that their opinions and tactics are as disgusting
as what the Christian community thinks of the Westboro Church's actions.
Right?I haven't heard any condemnation from the likes of
atl134, truthseeker, Furry1993, KJB1, or others for these kinds of tactics, only
support.Judging by the comments so far, I see that the
"pro-gay" activists are well represented here. They flood forums like
this one with their message to give the impression that their point of view is
much more popular than it really is among the population at large.
This letter deserves a better fisking than 200 words allows.The call
to boycott Ender's Game was not over Card's views in marriage; he has
a long and documented history of virulent anti-gay statements, including wanting
to make it illegal to be gay, and of using his money to support campaigns
against gay persons. Card wants to make it illegal to be gay and now he is
whining that gay people are not going to give him their money.The
letter misrepresents the Supreme Court decisions on both DOMA and Prop 8. Prop
8 was found unconstitutional by both lower courts that heard the case. The
Court decision essentially upheld that broader ruling. On DOMA, the court
struck down the federal ban on recognizing legally performed same sex
marriages.The call for a boycott hopes to raise awareness of
Card's activities and statements, to make people aware of his truly vicious
opinions. If you want an idea of the consequences of the actions he has
supported in the past, look at Russia today.
"Card does not have a right to my money."So does that mean
that homosexual couples don't have a right to force someone to give them
services? (See 13th amendment, prohibiting slavery)
I know for a fact that Mormons don't hate gay people. I know lots of
Mormon families that have gay family members and we love them. Mormons just
don't approve of redefining "Marriage" or condone some behaviors
associated with same sex attraction.It's a basic tenant of the
gospel that every human spirit is litterally related to God (regardless of
beliefs, how they live, or sexual orientation). So it would make no sense to
hate someone because of their sexual orientation or any trait, they are still
litterally spirit children of the same father (and therefor the same family).But I can tell many LGBT leaders do "hate" Mormons.I
was surfing channels one Saturday and came accross a documentary on the LDS
church and decided to watch it to see what other people think of us. It was
INCREDIBLY hate-filled, and quickly became evident it was produced by the LGBT
community. It was so full of lies and negativity I eventually had to turn it
off. I checked to see what channel it was on, and noticed that it ran like
every 3 hours on that channel for days.'Continued...
People have the right to boycott OSC for his views.Having said that
the hypocrisy of those who promote gay rights is apparent. For 20 years
they've pushed the idea of tolerance for diversity and then as soon as
people show up that disagree with them they try to bully them into silence.Same sex marriage is the new McCarthyism.Gays aren't
being denied their rights to marry. They can marry anyone of the opposite
gender just everyone else. No one would object if two bisexuals of the opposite
gender decided to marry or if a gay man and a lesbian woman wanted to marry for
whatever reason.Marriage is society's way to promote the idea
that children have the right to a father and a mother and that men should be
responsible for their reproductive actions. Promoting traditional marriage is a
powerful tool to fight poverty which is caused by out of wedlock births. That
the man and woman love each other is wonderful, but the point of marriage, at
the end of the day is less about validating romantic love and more about
promoting responsible procreation.
Prop 8 was found to be unconstitutional, and the USSC declined to hear an appeal
because those seeking the appeal lacked the proper legal status to do so.
That's not remotely the same thing as saying that the USSC tossed the issue
of same-sex marriage back to the states.I pay money all the time for
products and services that I know are provided by employees with whom I
disagree. The nature of the world is such that it's inevitable that we do
business with people who's beliefs we find objectionable.But if
the _owner_ of the brand makes it a point to work overtly to deny rights to a
minority, I reserve the right to decline an invitation to help enrich that
person. I'm not in any way trying to restrict Card's right to express
opinions with which I disagree, but I am refusing to let him do so with my
help.Consider: If a popular author took a leadership position in
organizations that sought to discriminate against Mormons, and one of that
author's books had just been made into a major Hollywood movie, what would
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments