Comments about ‘Orson Scott Card on controversy and 'Ender's Game': 'I’ve had no criticism. I’ve had ... personal attacks'’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Oct. 29 2013 2:40 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
kiddsport
Fairview, UT

Mukkake:
That's called pirating and is punishable by significant fines and imprisonment. Another word for it is theft. Are we still allowed to use those terms? Do we still understand their moral significance?
To LGBTs:
Perhaps OSCs remarks were driven by the counsel, "it becometh every man who hath been warned to warn his neighbor." Not out of hate but of love and concern, "in mildness and in meekness." I didn't see OSCs comments but I would hope they were characterized as such.
We can treat others who are different with all respect due while holding true to our own moral dictates.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@duckhunter

So I tried last night to post a response to you. I quoted from Mr. Card but the DN found them to offensive to post, which pretty much proves the point. When someone buts that kind of hatred out into the world they are likely to receive hatred back.

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@Jim --

"So much for First amendment rights."

NOM is currently running TWO boycotts, against companies with pro-gay policies. Why is it okay for them to boycott, but not for anyone else?

As for me, I encourage everyone to go see "Ender's Game".

EVERYONE who supports gay rights should go to see this movie.

The production company in charge of the movie, Lionsgate Films, is being honored by the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network for its extensive pro-gay policies.

The studio is an industry leader in ensuring workplace protections and benefits for LGBT people, including benefits for same-sex couples. It has also previously produced excellent gay-inclusive movies like "Gods and Monsters" and "The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Additionally, Lionsgate plans to host an LGBT-oriented fundraiser in association with the opening of the film.

So we can choose to boycott one guy who made anti-gay remarks, or we can support a pro-gay company that employs hundreds.

Support gay rights! Go see "Ender's Game"!

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@spring street

I doubt your comment was denied because it quoted Card, the dnews has a very inconsistent manner of moderating the site, they've denied comments of mine that weren't argumentative or offensive in the least. If you look above you'll see they've now gone back and erased the post with the question I aked you were trying to reply to, such is their inconsistency.

That said I have read Card's comments and they are not in the least bit hate filled. Certainly he differs on the subject than you do but that doesn't mean he is filled with hate. I also oppose gay marriage but I certainly don't hate gays and I won't be intimidated into shutting up my opinions on the matter.

I understand that the pro gay agenda's method is to marginalize and intimidate those that oppose their agenda, paint them as bigots and homophobes, by doing that they think it will shut them up. Sadly they have had some success doing it, but some of us won't shut up, some of us won't be intimidated, Scott card is one of those people. Good for him.

The Skeptical Chymist
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Those who claim that Mr. Card's first amendment rights are being violated have a poor understanding of the first amendment. The first amendment proclaims that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." The government has done absolutely nothing to limit Mr. Card's freedom of speech, so there has been no violation of his freedom of speech. If individuals choose not to listen to him, that is certainly their right. Likewise, it is their right not to attend a movie based on his book.

Whenever the left chooses to boycott something (such as Chick-Fil-A or Hobby Lobby), the right complains that their freedom of speech is being violated. Nonsense! Likewise, if the right chooses to boycott J.C.Penney's for its support of same-sex marriage, that is no violation of the free speech rights of J.C.Penney's executives either.

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

kiddsport:
[That's called pirating and is punishable by significant fines and imprisonment.]

I've been doing it for 15 years and have yet to see either.

[Another word for it is theft.]

Only because corporations convinced the government to call it that.

Contrariusier
mid-state, TN

@Duckhunter --

"I doubt your comment was denied because it quoted Card"

Actually, Spring Street is correct. I have also tried, twice, to post quotes from Card to this thread. Evidently the DN moderators really do think that Card's comments are too hateful to be suitable for posting.

"Certainly he differs on the subject than you do but that doesn't mean he is filled with hate."

Card has specifically advocated insurrection against the Federal government (he did that right here in the Deseret News) over the issue of gay marriage, and he has specifically stated that gay people should be treated as second-class citizens. What is not hateful about such statements?

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@contrariuser

No they are not denying your post because it quotes Card, his comments have been printed in this very paper. They obviously think the manner you are trying to post them, your spin on them, is either faulty or else argumentative.

Once again the Dnews is very inconsistent with how they moderate things around here but it is what it is, they own the site.

That said I do not agree with your spin on Card's comments in the slightest, I have read them and he is reasonable and persuasive as well as being forthright. You just don't like them so you want to paint them as bigoted.

Any comment opposing gay marriage is going to be spun as "hateful" or bigoted by people such as yourself that support gay marriage. That is your agenda, that is how you want to debate this subject, those are your talking points. No one can oppose it without being painted as a bigot because that is your narrative. Opposition to gay marriage is bigotry, hate, and oppression, is that not what the gay marriage supporters claim?

All opposition is bigotry, we get it.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@duckhiunter

three times I have tried to post his quotes and been denied. You re right some of his quotes have been published but the most hateful have not appeared in this paper, the question is why does the DN want to keep it secret if its not hateful?

SlopJ30
St Louis, MO

Jim says "So much for First amendment rights."

You clearly do not understand the concept of "freedom of speech." If the government were attempting to suppress Mr. Card or passing laws saying citizent couldn't speak or write in opposition of gay marriage, then you would have a point. That's not happening, all theoretical hysterical, hand-wringing predictions about the future of the US aside.

Are you suggesting that private citizens should not be allowed to organize a boycott of a movie or say they think Mr. Card and his agenda are wrong and harmful? Essentially, a gay-rights opponent can cloak themselves in the First Amendment, but proponents can't, is that it?

I cringed when I read Card's views, but I think a boycott is ineffectual at best, counterproductive at worst. If there's anything I'm sure about, it's that this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

Contrariusier
mid-state, TN

@Duckhunter --

"Once again the Dnews is very inconsistent"

I agree with you there, at least.

Trying again --

1. "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..."
-- He didn't say "vote the bums out of office" or "we'll get em at the next election" -- He said "destroy" that government "and bring it down" -- and earlier in that passage he also said "by whatever means".
-- That's insurrection. Card is actually willing to incite the destruction of the Federal government.

2. Married gays: "They steal from me what I treasure most".
-- Are married gay people somehow forcing him to get divorced?? How do gay people "steal" anything??

3. Gays in church: "They are wolves in sheep's clothing, preaching meekness while attempting to devour the flock."
-- Gay people want to "devour" Christians??

4. Gays in general: "those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society."
-- Yup, he specifically wants second class citizenship for gays.

How are these statements NOT hateful?

NC Rick
Chapel Hill, NC

What a minute now, Orson Scott Card is decrying "personal attacks" against him? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. He's been launching personal attacks against the President and any and all people who do not share his extreme political views on his blog (The Ornery American) and the Rhino Times for many years.

“I’ve had no criticism. I’ve had savage, lying, deceptive personal attacks, but no actual criticism because they’ve never addressed any of my actual ideas....Character assassination seems to be the only political method that is in use today, and I don’t play that game..."

Excuse me OSC, but you are a master at that game and have been for years. So many of your posts are just that, character assassinations devoid of cogent thought or valid criticism. Wow, talk about hypocritical. If you are going to dish out the hate it seems reasonable to expect you are going to get some of it back.

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

@contrariusier

Most of those you took completely out of context and ommitted key parts of them.

Let's take #4

"those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society."

He said "sexual behavior" you added the "gay" part. Certainly gay acts can be included in any explanantion of "sexual behavior" but what about rape? What about incest? What about beastiality? What about pedophilia?

All of those are also "sexual behavior" and I'm just wondering if practitioners of those things should be "permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society." or if Mr. Card is correct in saying that "those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society."

Yes i know you are going to exempt homosexual behavior from the others, that is the gay narrative afterall, but Mr. card is correct when he references "society's regulation". Obviously society should regulate sexual behavior shouldn't it? Or are you suggessting that all of those other forms be allowed as well?

Contrariusiest
mid-state, TN

@Duckhunter --

"He said "sexual behavior" you added the "gay" part."

No, I didn't. He wasn't talking about rape or incest -- he was talking about gay people. It was an article about the Lawrence SCOTUS case. He thought that sodomy laws should have remained on the books. He specifically said: " Laws against homosexual behavior should remain on the books" -- and yes, that's a direct quote. Again, he wants gays to be treated as second-class citizens.

Nice try at obfuscation, though. ;-)

I'l repeat: Card has advocated insurrection because of gay marriage. He has accused gays of stealing from him. He has accused gays of wanting to devour the Church flock. He has specifically declared that gays should be treated as second-class citizens.

How is any of that NOT hateful?

1978
Salt Lake City, UT

"Whenever the left chooses to boycott something (such as Chick-Fil-A or Hobby Lobby), the right complains that their freedom of speech is being violated."

No not really - We just end up shopping there. By the way thanks for the information on Hobby Lobby. Looks like I am going to be eating more chicken and now buying some "hobby" stuff.

One Angry Salebarn Worker
Madison, SD

Not normally my viewing fare, but I will see Enders Game because of type of people who oppose it--and encourage others to do the same.

Jeff
Temple City, CA

I am totally in favor of boycotts. I boycott R-rated films, and I frequently boycott films that are made by people whose political views I oppose. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone declaring a boycott of Orson Scott Card, Utah, Temple Square, or even me.

I will not join the boycott of "Ender's Game." I would have privately boycotted the film if it had been rated R, and it isn't. Further, I love the book. I consider it one of the best science fiction books of the 20th Century. It is a profound book and deeply moving. I hope the film does it justice.

Besides, in Card's case, I find that I agree with his politics anyway, so I'm inclined to support him for political reasons. I don't want that to color my appraisal of the film, but I can't escape the fact that it might.

Artistically, I hope the film is successful. Politically, I really hope the film is successful. But if a boycott is successful (which I doubt), or if the film is no good (which I hope not), then I still have that wonderful book.

Ranch
Here, UT

Poor Scotty. It isn't "lying, deceptive, personal attacks" to criticize you for your own words.

Ranch
Here, UT

Bigotry and discrimination have no place in our society. Those who practice it should be criticized for it; including Scott Card.

Contrariusest
Nashville, TN

@One Angry Salebarn Worker --

"Not normally my viewing fare, but I will see Enders Game because of type of people who oppose it--and encourage others to do the same."

Great. Support gay rights, and recruit others to do the same. It's great to hear that you'll be with us on this! :-)

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments