Orson Scott Card: State job is not to redefine marriage

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • AdmiralEnderWiggin SÃo Paulo, 00
    Aug. 26, 2013 7:39 a.m.

    "The laws concerning marriage did not create marriage, they merely attempted to solve problems in such areas as inheritance, property, paternity, divorce, adoption and so on" - O.S.C. from this article.

    This quote highlights the exact same reason why gay marriage had to be allowed. To be trully democratic and accept everybody in society, homosexual people need to have their rights on equal footing to heterosexual people. It's all about legalities. Yes ... surely it may not be a relationship where the couple can generate new children , but they often adopt and treat children better than the couple that abandoned the child. What if this is the natures way of guaranteeing that every children has the chance to be treated well ? But I digress, the point is that legaly homosecuals need their right of legal marriage , and that's not inventing marriage, that's fixing the law to make sure all citizens have their rights equally. I'm disapointed to see the author of one book such as Ender's Game have this view on REAL LIFE relationships.

  • Derrick Clements Provo, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    One sentence I agree with Mr. Card: "Biological imperatives trump laws." Homosexuality is perfectly natural and perfectly biological. To legislate them out of existence is a fool's errand.

  • derekm Farley, MO
    July 12, 2013 7:49 a.m.

    Mormons are exciting the pro-gay backlash by being so virulently anti-homosexual, this will result in accelerating the legalization and acceptance of homosexual marriage, which will also have the added benefit of leading to the decriminalization of polygamy.

  • derekm Farley, MO
    July 12, 2013 7:47 a.m.

    In ancient society the nobility had a practice of Affrèrement, whereby unrelated same-sex couples would unite their estates for the raising of family and for jointly holding property. These unions were recorded in parish records as being equivalent to opposite-sex unions.

  • JVodonick Nevada City, CA
    July 9, 2013 6:25 p.m.

    I have long been a fan of Mr. Card's speculative fiction. He should stick to speculative fiction and eschew pronouncements on the destruction of democracy since he has just demonstrated his complete ignorance of the democratic process as he has demonstrated his inability to understand the workings of the Bill of Rights. The democratic process is a fluid process (as is the application of the Constitution of the United States) that fits its self to the particular time and society to which it is to be applied. Mr. Card may recall that at one time one person could be bought and sold by another person in this country, a practice that is now repugnant to everyone with a pulse. I anticipate that in a very short period of time those people who share Mr. Card's stilted view of relationship will be tossed into the same trashbin of value as those who fought on the loosing side during the Civil War. Stick to fiction Mr. Card, you are no good at anything else.

  • lenscraft Sausalito, CA
    July 9, 2013 9:36 a.m.

    Orson Scott Card, who is a board member of the National Organization against Marriage (NOM): “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.”

    That counts as sedition and incitement.

  • sukiyhtaky us, CA
    July 8, 2013 3:00 a.m.

    I also have to question his sincere committment to what he terms "faithful sexual monogamy" when he slyly limits its "persistence until death" when he knows the LDS belief is that polygamy once again will reign supreme. Since he readily insists that sexual monogamy provides protection to both the husband and wife, will he be rallying the masses when he moves on to the next realm? I myself am campaigning for polyandry ;) and feel really maligned because while championing the rights of the LGBT and their motto to be allowed to "marry who they love" the liberal arm of the government including all the civil rights champions at MSNBC seem to feel that while it is Ok for LGBT to marry it isn't for others who are heterosexual but just can't make up their mind. I was even hurt to hear Rachel Maddow label heterosexual polyandrites as deviant. Everybody has a dog in this fight so it seems. I will be buying a ticket though to your movie...it better be good for what I'm going to have to pay...but that is a whole other issue.

  • sukiyhtaky us, CA
    July 8, 2013 2:59 a.m.

    While I don't entirely disagree with the writer, I do find it ludicrous for him to suggest that the feds do not have the right to interfere with what should be a state matter especially on this issue. With regards to the immediate issue of marriage, Utah bowed quite deeply to the feds when it came to polygamy which was exactly in the same boat as gay marriage.