73 réponses à ce sujet

[Deran2]

 This should be fun to watch. I'll repost my OSD quote from the last topic.

In the first place, no law in any state in the United States now or ever has forbidden homosexuals to marry. The law has never asked that a man prove his heterosexuality in order to marry a woman, or a woman hers in order to marry a man.
Any homosexual man who can persuade a woman to take him as her husband can avail himself of all the rights of husbandhood under the law. And, in fact, many homosexual men have done precisely that, without any legal prejudice at all.
Ditto with lesbian women. Many have married men and borne children. And while a fair number of such marriages in recent years have ended in divorce, there are many that have not.

So it is a flat lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage. To get those civil rights, all homosexuals have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage.In order to claim that they are deprived, you have to change the meaning of "marriage" to include a relationship that it has never included before this generation, anywhere on earth.

Just because homosexual partners wish to be called "married" and wish to force everyone else around them to regard them as "married," does not mean that their Humpty-Dumpty-ish wish should be granted at the expense of the common language, democratic process, and the facts of human social organization.

However emotionally bonded a pair of homosexual lovers may feel themselves to be, what they are doing is not marriage. Nor does society benefit in any way from treating it as if it were.

Modifié par Deran2, 05 janvier 2010 - 09:22 .

[El-Destructo]

Anyway, thank you for humoring me before. I think I better understand the furor over this. In a way, I suppose it is nice that Bioware will allow the man to write for them rather than persecuting his ability as a writer due to his personal opinions. But, I am sure they will see, maybe even -expect-, some backlash over this from the consumer base. I'm not all that big on comics anyhow, so it is little matter to me other than my being interested in the background of the dispute.

[OldMan91]

In the original thread, there were posters who mentioned Card not being a violent person at all.

Of course, this quote from one of his articles proves otherwise:

Why should married people feel the slightest loyalty to a government or society that are conspiring to encourage reproductive and/or marital dysfunction in their children?

...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.

I definitely will not be buying the comic, as excited as I am to see one related to Dragon Age.

Modifié par OldMan91, 05 janvier 2010 - 10:04 .

[El-Destructo]

-double post

Modifié par El-Destructo, 05 janvier 2010 - 10:15 .

[OldMan91]

If he was referring to peacefully changing a government through the ballot, he would have used another word other than "destroy".

[Godak]

I'm rather disturbed that such a forward-thinking game is being turned into a comic written by such a back-water has-been. Seriously...just...wow.

The first and greatest threat from court decisions in California and Massachusetts, giving legal recognition to 'gay marriage,' is that it marks the end of democracy in America. These judges are making new law without any democratic process; in fact, their decisions are striking down laws enacted by majority vote

All right, Mr. Card. Let me explain something to you: the United States' government is set up in such a way that it is able to protect minority groups from majority oppression. If we allowed the South to vote on the issue of slavery, I have no doubt that they would still be plowing cotton fields (Do you do that? Do you plow cotton fields? )

Also, read this. Just...read it. Then throw-up a few times. Lick it all up and begin the process a-new.

http://archive.salon...ard/index2.html

[El-Destructo]

Being the Devil's advocate for a moment, guns and bombs are not the only way to 'destroy' a government. In a democracy, the simplest means of change is to simply fight back with votes. I suppose it depends on exactly how far he is willing to go to accomplish a change of government, rather than the fact that he wants to change the government at all, that determines whether he is reasonable or radical.

[El-Destructo]

OldMan91 wrote...

If he was referring to peacefully changing a government through the ballot, he would have used another word other than "destroy".

It is strong wording, definately, but it is open to interpretation to me, as I have little knowledge of how extreme his ideology is. I would need more information before I could rest on the statement as verifiable proof.

[Godak]

I don't know of Cards "revolutionary" politics, but his anti-gay sentiment is abundantly clear. Really, I don't know anyone else who has flat-out said that gays don't deserve the same rights as everyone else.

[uberman409]

Am I the only one who doesn't give a bantha poodoo about the fact that he doesn't support gay marriage? He's an excellent writer. It's almost like you're spitting on his work because you don't like his political choices. I enjoyed his work. I disagree with him most heartily on his gay rights stance, but that doesn't negate his skill. I won't forget my love of the Ender's Game series.



Furthermore, Godak, I am the son of a Southerner and am deeply offended by your insinuation that Southerners are racist bigots. It's insulting. My father, and his father and mother before him, are some of the most reasonable and intelligent people I have ever met. That you would make a generalization contradicts my general assumption that we are reasonable people on this forum. I'll give you one chance to either apologize, or back up your statement.



I apologize if you were making a historical reference. If you were, I will refute it for a few reasons.

[Deran2]

uberman409 wrote...

Am I the only one who doesn't give a bantha poodoo about the fact that he doesn't support gay marriage? He's an excellent writer. It's almost like you're spitting on his work because you don't like his political choices. I enjoyed his work. I disagree with him most heartily on his gay rights stance, but that doesn't negate his skill. I won't forget my love of the Ender's Game series.

Furthermore, Godak, I am the son of a Southerner and am deeply offended by your insinuation that Southerners are racist bigots. It's insulting. My father, and his father and mother before him, are some of the most reasonable and intelligent people I have ever met. That you would make a generalization contradicts my general assumption that we are reasonable people on this forum. I'll give you one chance to either apologize, or back up your statement.

I apologize if you were making a historical reference. If you were, I will refute it for a few reasons.

No one is taking away from his writing skills, but its fair for people not to want to support his work due to his increadibly extreme beliefs and rantings. I love the Ender series, I liked his first Iron Man mini-series, but I can't stand the man as a person.

[uberman409]

Who was that famous SciFi writer who went to southeast Asia to touch little boys? I forgot his name. But people still buy his books and read them.



Better yet, Van Gogh. He cut his ear off, was a complete nutter, yet people still appreciate his work and wouldn't mind if he made another one.



The point is: It doesn't matter that his personal views are antiquated and barbaric by our standards. Good work is still good work, and to moan about the work itself because the writer is a nutter makes no sense whatsoever.

[Deran2]

uberman409 wrote...

Who was that famous SciFi writer who went to southeast Asia to touch little boys? I forgot his name. But people still buy his books and read them.

Better yet, Van Gogh. He cut his ear off, was a complete nutter, yet people still appreciate his work and wouldn't mind if he made another one.

The point is: It doesn't matter that his personal views are antiquated and barbaric by our standards. Good work is still good work, and to moan about the work itself because the writer is a nutter makes no sense whatsoever.

Again, no one is denying the man has skill. That isn't the point however. If people don't agree with his views and beliefs they are free to not support him because of it. Good or not.

[Medhia Nox]

A man's skills are irrellevant to me.

He may be an excellent athlete.. but if his life is surrounded with drugs and civic disruption.. I do not admire that man.

Or, he may be a great orator and governor of men, but if his private life - which is now the providence of the people - is made known to be such that he is living in debauchery.. I do not wish him to govern over me.

Likewise.. a writer, no matter how flowery of speech or convincing in language he may be.. is worth nothing (to me) if his words are used to spread.. or fund.. hatred.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 06 janvier 2010 - 03:44 .

[uberman409]

*sigh*



If you think that his work is good, then you don't HAVE to admire his person. However, to completely dump on his work just because he's a jackass is irrational. I understand your loathing for his personality. However, I'd rather have a nutjob who is an excellent writer writing the comic than a perfectly nice MORON with no writing skills whatsoever.



There is a certain barrier between work and private life. If you admire a writer for his work, for his skill, then admire him for his work and skill. Disagree with him all you want, hate his personality. But you can't just disregard the fact that he knows how to write, and him writing the comic is a pretty damn good thing, and if BioWare is displeased with his writing, if he starts trying to spread stuff, they can easily say "you're out."

[elys]

I myself also make a difference between the person and the work produced.

There is so many good things we like without knowing "who" really created them.



But I guess I can understand some of the views in this topic, as they dislike so much what he is trying to promote/achieve in life, that they do not want to support him in anyway which means not helping him by not buying any work he produces (whatever the quality), and so not increasing his wealth or his mediatic influence etc...

[uberman409]

That's kinda... stupid, in my opinion. It's understandable, if he was independently making anvilicious stories to force anti-gay morals, but he was hired by BioWare, an awfully progressive game studio, to write a comic for THEM. Ergo, if it isn't up to par FOR THEM, they can tell him to bugger off.

[Deran2]

uberman409 wrote...

That's kinda... stupid, in my opinion. It's understandable, if he was independently making anvilicious stories to force anti-gay morals, but he was hired by BioWare, an awfully progressive game studio, to write a comic for THEM. Ergo, if it isn't up to par FOR THEM, they can tell him to bugger off.

So its stupid to stand up for your beliefs and not give money to someone who uses it to fund and spread his hatred against the very people who you are part of?

[uberman409]

Deran2 wrote...

uberman409 wrote...

That's kinda... stupid, in my opinion. It's understandable, if he was independently making anvilicious stories to force anti-gay morals, but he was hired by BioWare, an awfully progressive game studio, to write a comic for THEM. Ergo, if it isn't up to par FOR THEM, they can tell him to bugger off.

So its stupid to stand up for your beliefs and not give money to someone who uses it to fund and spread his hatred against the very people who you are part of?

I never said that it was stupid to stand up for your beliefs, I never said that, but you can do it in so many other ways. WHINING to BioWare about how mean the big bad writer is, does nothing, and helps no one. What it does do is impede the production of a potential work of literary art.  I have only the utmost disrespect for those who would impede art simply because the artist is a pompous moron. You are no better than him in your attempts to squash art.

He doesn't influence anyone with his opinions, as it is obvious that he is a radical. He's like the stereotypical communist, raving about evil capitalist pigs, in his radicalism. He's harmless. Since he's harmless, why squash his work? You're a buffoon if you think that what you do helps at all. Send him a letter, better yet, organize a series of well-worded letters from multiple people, gay and straight.

Also, he has spread no hate against me. I'm a straight, caucasian male. How has he spread hate against me?

Go back and rethink your position. That you would reject art because of the artist and not solely based on the art itself is shameful, and shows how much of an ignorant bigot you are.

[Deran2]

uberman409 wrote...
I never said that it was stupid to stand up for your beliefs, I never said that, but you can do it in so many other ways. WHINING to BioWare about how mean the big bad writer is, does nothing, and helps no one. What it does do is impede the production of a potential work of literary art.  I have only the utmost disrespect for those who would impede art simply because the artist is a pompous moron. You are no better than him in your attempts to squash art.

He doesn't influence anyone with his opinions, as it is obvious that he is a radical. He's like the stereotypical communist, raving about evil capitalist pigs, in his radicalism. He's harmless. Since he's harmless, why squash his work? You're a buffoon if you think that what you do helps at all. Send him a letter, better yet, organize a series of well-worded letters from multiple people, gay and straight.

Also, he has spread no hate against me. I'm a straight, caucasian male. How has he spread hate against me?

Go back and rethink your position. That you would reject art because of the artist and not solely based on the art itself is shameful, and shows how much of an ignorant bigot you are.

If you go back and read the first page of the topic this discussion started in you would see that I quite clearly stated I have no problem with him writing the comic. I'm not telling Bioware not to hire him, nor am I saying that no one should buy it. That's your own choice. I won't be buying it. I don't expect everyone else to follow my lead. People will do whatever the heck they want with their money, its not my place to say they shouldn't or they can't. And, for the third time now, I have nothing against his work. He is a good writer and has earned his fans, but I do not wish to give him my money. I've been reading the Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow comics for a while as they have been good. Since learning more about the man and what he has said I'm seriously considering dropping them from my reading list. They're almost done so I probably wont, but if I had known before hand I would have. I own all of the Ender novels as well. Haven't got through all of them yet, but I still intend to as I already bought them. I do not want to give more money to someone who would like nothing better than to see people like myself segregated from the rest of society and denied the same rights as people like yourself.

Using the terms "you" and "your" in my previous post was not intended as meaning I was talking about you. I don't remember the literary term for that type of sentence off hand, but the terms could easily be switched to "me" and "myself" or such similar words to describe the person writing the sentence.

[uberman409]

AH, I understand where you're coming from now. I thought you were raving about how he shouldn't be doing it. My apologies. I still think that sending a message textually is more efficient than moaning and withholding 20 dollars, but hey. Your choice.

[Panderfringe]

Associating with Card diminishes everyone.

Modifié par Panderfringe, 06 janvier 2010 - 06:40 .

[uberman409]

Panderfringe wrote...

Associating with Card diminishes everyone.

Agreeing with him does, but he's a masterful writer.

[elys]

uberman409 wrote...

AH, I understand where you're coming from now. I thought you were raving about how he shouldn't be doing it. My apologies. I still think that sending a message textually is more efficient than moaning and withholding 20 dollars, but hey. Your choice.

Unfortunaly in many cases, it's more efficient to cut down their income (poke where it hurts) than sending a message who will be directly forwarded to the trash, because they don't care about you but about your money 

Modifié par elys, 06 janvier 2010 - 06:55 .