Orson Scott Card's Superman comic causes a furor

[Windseeker]

Orson Scott Card's Superman comic causes a furor

I've been following this story for a while and I'm really disappointed. It seems like with the Chick-fil-A thing and more recently the boycott and vilification of anyone who supports traditional values the LGBT rights movement is clearly on the attack and is starting be as irritating and annoying as the Westboro Baptist Church.

Clearly those who push to silence any who disagree with them are a long way from promoting tolerance.

Being raised in the Church and having traditional values never prevented me from listening to Elton John, Erasure or the Smiths. I remember fondly picking up the CD and listening to Tegan and Sarah on my trip along the beautiful Columbia River Gorge on my way to Hood River to learn to kiteboard for my first time. I've never felt the need to boycott or suppress the talents of those I disagree with in other areas.

I've been thinking a while now how victim-hood is one of the basic roots of evil in this world. Starting with Cain and Abel and all the subsequent wars, WWII, and recently with Christopher Dorner.

I think what set's apart the early American Revolutionaries, Martin Luther Kings and Gandhi of the world apart from the Adolf Hitlers and Timothy McVeighs is an understanding and application of true principles like Freedom and Responsibility.

Reminds me of this

The more I experience in this life the clearer the gospel stands as the only true remedy for what ails this world. “Be the change you want to see in the world" Gandhi said and the gospel shows us not only how to view the world correctly but it teaches us how to change and provides a way for us to change.

I'm glad to see that DC Comics is not caving. As I grow tired of the hypocrisy I see demonstrated constantly by those who seek in their self-interest to right what they think is wrong I'm reminded to be careful of perpetrating the victimhood mentality.

How do you guys see these attempts to silence people and when if ever do you feel they are justified? Am I just being a homophobe here?

[Backroads]

How is signing a petition to get someone fired simply because you dis agree with their views any less hateful than simply standing up for your own views?

[Vort]

It is a manifestation of the rank hypocrisy common in the homosexual lobby. No one is supposed to mistreat or even speak ill of homosexuality or homosexuals, but of course that rule does not apply to them.

Things will get much, much worse before they get better, and I doubt I will live to see that eventuality. Cowards and the weak-minded will buckle to the pressure of the homosexual lobby and embrace homosexuality as a valid and acceptable "lifestyle choice". The innocent, mostly the rising generation, will grow up believing that homosex is morally equivalent to heterosex. The bitter and the defensive will vilify and reject all who go against the teachings of God, not just the weak and the perverse but the innocent and the honestly deceived, as well. It will take the Spirit of God in our lives and all our wisdom to navigate the correct path, and may God help our children and make us equal to the task of teaching them the truth when even the best of us has only a tenuous grasp on many such issues.

This is actually a wonderful illustration how safety is found, and is found only, in the kingdom of God. All other roads lead to Babylon.

[Guest gopecon]

Unfortunately for many on the left, tolerance for other views ends once one disagrees with their politically correct views. This reminds me of the LDS theater manager who was fired in CA after giving money to the Prop 8 campaign.

[Wingnut]

I fail to understand what an author contributing to a storyline has to do with LGBT issues. I'm not familiar with the comics, but are there any LGBT characters who might be affected by Card's participation?

[Soulsearcher]

lol i think they are taking their lead from focus on the family and one million moms lol. Show support for GLBT and off with your head. looks like both sides have their war mongers.

And yes i do think this whole thing is silly, as long as he doesn't write anything anti gay then no reason to worry about his personal beliefs.

[LittleWyvern]

*opened thread*

*saw Hitler picture*

*saw "LGBT" and "Chick-fil-a" in the post*

[ploomf]

I think this is exceedingly silly but it's no sillier than One Million Moms calling for a boycott of JC Penney because they chose Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson and because they put a pair of Lesbian mothers in a mothers day ad, or the American Family Association calling for a boycott of Google because of their support for LGBT rights, or conservatives calling for a boycott of Oreo because of their rainbow cookie last year. Let's not pretend that the left is the only side that calls for boycotts of views they don't like. Both sides are exceedingly silly.

[Backroads]

Granted, I do think everyone has the right to think what they want and even say what they want, but I can't help but be annoyed when it becomes a witch hunt (and this does go for both sides).

[Anddenex]

How do you guys see these attempts to silence people and when if ever do you feel they are justified? Am I just being a homophobe here?

Any attempt to silence a person's viewpoint is indeed intolerant and abusive. Every person has a right to express themselves, their ideology's, their theologies, etc...

I also, feel they have a right to express themselves however in this manner should they feel the need to. If any organization of people want to show their hypocrisy, let them.

I firmly believe we are justified in silencing people when they seek to openly rid other people of divine rights, rights which have been designated by our creator (Note: God given rights, not man made rights, because anybody can vote a right into existence through democracy -- just look at America for examples). If a divine right is not in jeopardy, then there is no need to silence any efforts by other people.

These attempts, no matter the organization, need to be addressed and where possible silenced.

No, you are not a homophobe, because you are willing to stand up for your beliefs. Although, people within our nation accuse others of such.

I like this quote:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

Edited February 15, 2013 by Anddenex

[ploomf]

I like this quote:

I prefer "I may not agree with your bumper sticker; but I will defend your right to stick it."

[Anddenex]

I prefer "I may not agree with your bumper sticker; but I will defend your right to stick it."

I love it!

[Jedi_Nephite]

I think this is exceedingly silly but it's no sillier than One Million Moms calling for a boycott of JC Penney because they chose Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson and because they put a pair of Lesbian mothers in a mothers day ad, or the American Family Association calling for a boycott of Google because of their support for LGBT rights, or conservatives calling for a boycott of Oreo because of their rainbow cookie last year. Let's not pretend that the left is the only side that calls for boycotts of views they don't like. Both sides are exceedingly silly.

I'm not exactly sure how it is "exceedingly silly" to boycott a company that put something as inappropriate as lesbian mothers in a mother's day ad. Personally, I am glad to see that more organizations are now taking a stand against this kind of thing.

And, let's not forget that when you shop at these places, these same companies often donate a percentage of their proceeds to support the very organizations that adamantly fight against the very beliefs that we, as LDS, have been counseled by the First Presidency to take a stand for.

[ploomf]

It's fine to disagree with the ad. I personally see nothing offensive or inappropriate about it, but if you don't like a companies values don't shop there, that's fine. What I find very silly and eye roll worthy is to loudly call for boycotts of companies and individuals that you disagree with and then turn around and cry persecution when the other side does the exact same thing to you.

[MarginOfError]

I'm not exactly sure how it is "exceedingly silly" to boycott a company that put something as inappropriate as lesbian mothers in a mother's day ad. Personally, I am glad to see that more organizations are now taking a stand against this kind of thing.

And, let's not forget that when you shop at these places, these same companies often donate a percentage of their proceeds to support the very organizations that adamantly fight against the very beliefs that we, as LDS, have been counseled by the First Presidency to take a stand for.

As ploomf pointed out, it's just as exceedingly silly for people who disagree with the ad that has lebian mothers to boycott the company as it is for people who diagree with Orson Scott Card to boycott the comics he writes.

[Traveler]

More than not, the reason that "intimidation" tactics are used to force issues is that other means do not or are not working. Many think that just because one element in a side of a disagreement is resorting to intimidation that they are justified in returning the same - thus a tit for tat mentality. This only will make matters worse.

I personally have come to object to homosexual arguments or support for the following reasons:

1. Because I see no benefit for society in encouraging homosexuality. This does not mean that homosexuality needs to be punished or hated - just that there is no logic in justifying homosexuality as being as important to society as heterosexual relationships. I see no justification in encouraging homosexuality or the necessity of society applying positive reinforcements.

2. Because the mainstream support for homosexuality will not tolerate any discussion that they deem questions or does not completely support their position. This attitude forces any question or opposition to their agenda to full out confrontation. As I have asked for discussion for social benefit (not individual benefit) - instead of responding - I have been attracted and viciously accused of bigotry and prejudice. Thus I have come to the conclusion that those that support homosexuality - do so out of emotion void of logic and reason. Therefore they can only defend their position with accusations against non-proponents.

3. Because I object to the notion by the gay and lesbian community that any one that does not support their cause - argue in their behalf and force positive social reinforcement for their agenda is a delinquent force of society and must be punished until they conform to the gay and lesbian agenda of superficial and unwarranted positive social reinforcement.

4. I have been personal recruited, attacked and forced to defend myself and even my very life against violent homosexual intrusions. I have come to realize that there are many within the homosexual community that are not violent threats but I have also discovered that the mainstream supporters of homosexuality are in a great deal of denial and will do little or nothing to insure that any "recruiting" efforts in their ranks are stopped or even treated at least as severely as opponents to their agenda. Depicting heterosexual rape in the media and entertainment is considered honest and a way to bring attention to stop such behaviors - but there is no allowance for depicting the equivalent homosexual rape to bring attention and stop such behaviors.

In essence there is no level playing field to have any discussion or voice concerns. The sad element of all this is the damage done to individuals struggling with their homosexuality - especially within the LDS community. Unlike those that suffer drug addictions there is little support or positive reinforcement from anyone as a LDS homosexual to live the law of chastity as we understand it. Many, perhaps even most LDS see homosexuals as "damaged" good and there is no support - what-so-ever in the homosexual community for an LDS gay person trying to live the LDS law of chastity - indeed the concept of LDS marriage and chastity is a threat to the gay and lesbian community that must, in their minds be changed.

For this reason I believe that it is important for LDS to reach out in kindness to homosexuals. I an not certain if discussions of sexuality is any more beneficial with a homosexual than having a "drink" with an alcoholic - I believe the LDS message should be that same for homosexuals as the message is to all - Repent and live by and keep the commandments. That is the only road to happiness, joy and knowing one is a benefit to G-d and their fellow man.

The Traveler

Edited February 16, 2013 by Traveler

[Tough Grits]

Since when did personal views become the basis for hiring/firing?

Where does the line get drawn? So, eventually will we start hiring/firing people based on economic status, nationality, religion, culture, hair color, favorite genre of literature, gun ownership status, size of family, and so forth...

Really? Why not base hiring/firing on experience, qualifications, work ethics, performance, productivity, and so forth.

In our current society it is better to have a lazy, dishonest, unproductive, incompetent employee than to have an employee who has a view that is not politically correct.

(I couldn't find an emoticon standing on a soap box) I have an issue with the term "politically correct". Since when did politics or politicians set the standard for morality, decency, or honesty?

I have had gay friends in the past and I have a friend and co-worker right now who is gay. I love her dearly. We sit at lunch together. I love her and her family very much. She is a good teacher, she works hard, and she has stronger work ethics than many that I have seen.

Just like I would not want her to get fired because of a personal belief, I don't think Orson Scott Card (or anybody else) should be fired because of THEIR personal belief.

[Backroads]

I suppose if you are disappointed in a company hiring someone because of their beliefs, you have every right in the world to not support that company.

But some comments in the article made me wonder if we're heading into the direction of laws that will dictate just who companies can hire.

[captmoroniRM]

I think its funny the original article linked in here talks about his "vocal anti-gay political stance" but I clearly recall gay characters appearing in some of his works and they were portrayed favorably....Even in his Homecoming Series, which was basically a Sci-Fi retelling of several Book of Mormon stories.

[SanctitasDeo]

I think its funny the original article linked in here talks about his "vocal anti-gay political stance" but I clearly recall gay characters appearing in some of his works and they were portrayed favorably....Even in his Homecoming Series, which was basically a Sci-Fi retelling of several Book of Mormon stories.

This is what I thought when I saw it. For all that his public stance on gay marriage may sound pretty black and white, Card is an extremely interesting and nuanced person. He has at least one whole novel whose protagonists are gay and portrayed favorably. I haven't read the Homecoming books, but I am not surprised that there are gay characters there, too.

[talisyn]

I really don't like DC Comics..at all lol. But I'm glad they are sticking with creativity at least unless the comic doesn't sell well

Edited February 27, 2013 by talisyn
Whew that was close

[Soulsearcher]

I think its funny the original article linked in here talks about his "vocal anti-gay political stance" but I clearly recall gay characters appearing in some of his works and they were portrayed favorably....Even in his Homecoming Series, which was basically a Sci-Fi retelling of several Book of Mormon stories.

One of the issues they have is an essay he wrote around 1990. in this essay he made it clear that they should keep the laws on the books that prohibit homosexual behavior. He's since said that being things have changed and evolved he no longer holds that view, but was only keeping in line with the times and what conservatives viewed at the time. Secondly his involvement with the NOM organization isn't viewed too favorably.

All that being said, i did read up on some of his work and saw some of the examples of how he portrayed homosexuals and really have no issue with them. Some people have taken issue with some on if but they are really stretching to find those faults.

[Bini]

All I know is that I can't wait to watch the new Superman that's coming out this summer.

[LittleWyvern]

One of the issues they have is an essay he wrote around 1990.

Man, I hope nobody uses things I wrote in 1990 against me. I was just 1 year old and didn't know a whole lot. I think it's reasonable to not hold opinions from that long ago against me.

[Windseeker]

I think this is exceedingly silly but it's no sillier than One Million Moms calling for a boycott of JC Penney because they chose Ellen DeGeneres as a spokesperson and because they put a pair of Lesbian mothers in a mothers day ad, or the American Family Association calling for a boycott of Google because of their support for LGBT rights, or conservatives calling for a boycott of Oreo because of their rainbow cookie last year. Let's not pretend that the left is the only side that calls for boycotts of views they don't like. Both sides are exceedingly silly.

I find it interesting that Orson Scott Card gets boycotted for his beliefs in traditional marriage despite his writings showing homosexuals in a positive light, the very thing that JC Penney was boycotted for.

Once again this shows how the poltical agenda is more important than individual tolerance and acceptance.

Love the sinner condemn the sin is meaningless in todays society.