Ender's Game Author Asks For Tolerance After Boycott Threat

[Something Amyss]

"Now it will be interesting to see whether the victorious proponents of gay marriage will show tolerance toward those who disagreed with them when the issue was still in dispute," Card concludes.

Yeah, it really sucks when people are intolerant towards you, doesn't it OSC?

A lesson learned? Probably not.

There was a boycott planned?
Oh c'mon people. There's a word for you which I can't remember right now, and it's not a compliment. Why would you care about what he said? There's simply no point.

EDIT: I now see hate coming my way. Oh well. Not gonna retract.

It really is strange to see such vitriol towards people for choosing where they will spend their money.

If he's taken enough notice to make this statement, by the way, there clearly is a point. Since, you know, that was the point.

 

[Something Amyss]

The pro-gay advocates, to be comparable, would have to want to deny the anti-gay advocates a right that was enjoyed by everyone else.

For example, banning straight marriage while allowing gay marriage. A stance nobody takes. Except maybe Dan Savage. >.>

But yeah. The other part of this is that Card was looking to legally persecute a body of people for who they were, while the folks he's calling for tolerance from are objecting to purchasing from him for beliefs he still seems to hold.

 

[Ghonzor]

That's the fun thing about being a consumer. If you are an asshat, I don't have to give you my money. I don't plan to see Ender's Game. I bought a secondhand copy of the book, and I'll content myself to that. You don't get to ask for tolerance when you show none. That, and what Card's asking for isn't tolerance. He's asking us to overlook his close-minded, backwards way of thinking so that his wallet can be stuffed a little more.

 

[Abomination]

The pro-gay advocates, to be comparable, would have to want to deny the anti-gay advocates a right that was enjoyed by everyone else.

For example, banning straight marriage while allowing gay marriage. A stance nobody takes. Except maybe Dan Savage. >.>

But yeah. The other part of this is that Card was looking to legally persecute a body of people for who they were, while the folks he's calling for tolerance from are objecting to purchasing from him for beliefs he still seems to hold.

It almost looks like "Stop being intolerant - give me money."

It's a really absurd stance to take. It'd be like a politician demanding votes from people whom his political views would harm should he be elected. We're talking about an AUTHOR, the more money he has the more people he is going to be able to put his thoughts in front of... and those thoughts - as he has so clearly made public - may have homophobic messages and people who are pro-gay do not want to fund such literature being distributed to others.

Sure, he might not ever write a single homophobic word in his commercial works? but he?s got a higher chance than someone who isn?t homophobic.

 

[Amir Kondori]

Lot of self righteous people in this thread. I for one loved the books and I am atheist who thinks gay people should have all the same rights I do. But maybe some of you should practice a little forgiveness and humility.

If he wants to be forgiven, he should show humility, apologize for his bigotry, and ask to be forgiven.
He has no regretted anything he has done, he has not done ANYTHING yet that indicates he should be forgiven.

Would you forgive a racist if he said "race isn't an issue to me anymore so I won't support killing minorities, but I still hate all you kikes and negros." ?

To be 100% clear I don't think he has to apologize. These are his religious beliefs. He never, ever advocated for the killing of anyone. If you read his actual words he said that gay marriage should not be sanctioned by the state. I know some people want to equate that to racists "killing minorities" but it's not the same thing. He never said he hated gay people. He was measured, in my opinion, with his words and in his views.

But if it makes you feel like you are fighting the good fight go ahead and demonize the man and equate his position against gay marriage with racists advocating hate and murder. I'm sure you feel really superior.

 

[zefiris]

To be 100% clear I don't think he has to apologize.

Yes, he just advocated an armed uprising against gays.
Nothing to apologize for, clearly.

Fun fact, if he had said the exact same things, but been pro gay marriage, you'd be here, screeching for his head.

I love you whiteknights, I really do. "Waaah! Consumers must buy his stuff, or they're intolerant, waah".
Free speech doesn't mean that you have to support bigots, sorry guys. Nor does it mean that we have to support someone that advocated physical violence against gays.

That you seriously think that not buying his stuff is the same as ADVOCATING VIOLENCE says everything about you and your bigotry. Congrats: You managed to make OSC and his side look even worse.

. Case in point, Judaism is well known for Leviticus and I would be well within my right to call you an intolerant bigot if you started telling Jews how horrible their religion was because it didn't conform to your values.

Except Leviticus also bans a lot of other things, including the clothes you're wearing right now (Polyester!). Anyone who is arguing leviticus against gays is a gargantuan hypocrit to begin with.

It's funny that you think that tolerance means that your massive intolerance has to be tolerated just because you hide behind religion. Religion doesn't mean your intolerance has to be state policy, sorry to say. Your religious rights end at your own doorstep. Your religion doesn't give you a right to dictate how others live.

 

[Something Amyss]

It almost looks like "Stop being intolerant - give me money."

It's a really absurd stance to take.

Yes, but it's a very human stance to take. We tend to only be concerned with intolerance when it swings our way.

It'd be like a politician demanding votes from people whom his political views would harm should he be elected. We're talking about an AUTHOR, the more money he has the more people he is going to be able to put his thoughts in front of... and those thoughts - as he has so clearly made public - may have homophobic messages and people who are pro-gay do not want to fund such literature being distributed to others.

Sure, he might not ever write a single homophobic word in his commercial works? but he?s got a higher chance than someone who isn?t homophobic.

And really, the only reason anyone cares what Card has to say about homosexuality is because he's a renowned author. Making him a bigger success so more people will pay attention to some cranky dude's letters to the editor seems like it worsens the situation.

I mean, I'm not even sure I'd boycott his books. I've never been too interested in the Ender's Game deal. However, while I'm not sure I'd do it, I certainly don't think it's a bad thing.

 

[Syphous]

Meh, whatever. I love Ender's Game. And there is nothing homophobic written on a single page of it, so his personal beliefs don't really affect the project. I'll go see it for sure.

 

[theultimateend]

Well I hope you don't mind if I judge you by your cover, because your avatar is adorable ^_^

Why thank you! I don't know if or when I'll ever change it. That particular comic frame was too perfect to me.

Yours reminds me I should watch Futurama again...I wonder if my wife won't drop me. I've watched it perhaps...um...too much.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

To be 100% clear I don't think he has to apologize. These are his religious beliefs.

And yet you said that we should forgive him. Also, personal beliefs of any sort don't exempt you from making apologies.

He never, ever advocated for the killing of anyone.

I never said that he did. It was an analogy.

If you read his actual words he said that gay marriage should not be sanctioned by the state.

Yes and he said a lot of other things.

I know some people want to equate that to racists "killing minorities" but it's not the same thing.

You're projecting.

He never said he hated gay people. He was measured, in my opinion, with his words and in his views.

He just supports an organization that seeks to discriminate against them. He equates tolerating them to propaganda. He stated that open revolution is reasonable if gay marriage is allowed.

It's not hatred, it's just discrimination. You think that's better?

But if it makes you feel like you are fighting the good fight go ahead and demonize the man and equate his position against gay marriage with racists advocating hate and murder. I'm sure you feel really superior.

And now you've stooped to insults.

No. I don't feel like I'm fighting a good fight, I feel like I'm arguing what I believe to be right.

I'm arguing against apologists like you who simply come in and say "you guys are self-righteous" without addressing any of the issues. You said we should forgive him and show humility, and I thought that was hilarious because he has done neither.

 

[likalaruku]

If I judged the works of entertainers based on their personalities & opinions, then I would have precious little to watch, read, play, or listen to.

 

[spacecowboy86]

maybe I'm a bit confused and someone can clarify, but by the sound of this article he's not asking for peace just because he's scared it will hurt his sales. To me it just sounds like this guy's asking people to leave his political views away from a movie being created by many people (many of which probably don't agree with his opinion) about a book he wrote before any of this even existed. I get less of a "He's demanding tolerance because it will hurt his sales even though he didn't offer any before" vibe and more of "what's done is done, I lost the argument, you guys won, let's all be gentlemen about it and don't take your hatred for me out on everything related to my work."

I'm not defending what he's said regarding gay marriage. I'm just saying he doesn't seem to be selfishly covering his bases so much as humbly admitting defeat and wishing to move on.

(I realize he'll be getting royalties for the movie, but I don't think greed is what's behind this white flag)

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

I've had to stop caring about the political and religious views from authors, directors, actors, ect.

Otherwise, I'd scarcely be able to enjoy anything produced in the media.

Yup. I'll sign this as is and would like to promote it to be taught in schools.

How to (best) enjoy movies, music and books... and all arts.

Many a good actor or amazing artist is a complete schmuck when it comes to politics, and a scary melonfarmer when it comes to religion, bloody veganism or opinions on aliens and other nonsense. It does not impede my ability to enjoy them doing what they are good at.

Politicians, however, should be more... rooted in knowledge, facts and generally being sane.

Stuff like this makes me cringe, and it makes me question people... and things:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2343983/Whitby-Councillor-Simon-Parkes-tells-ITVs-The-Morning-I-lost-virginity-alien-holographic-age-FIVE.html

 

[Legion]

"Now it will be interesting to see whether the victorious proponents of gay marriage will show tolerance toward those who disagreed with them when the issue was still in dispute," Card concludes.

Uh... why should they? Tolerating bigotry isn't a good thing you know, and claiming people are bigots for not tolerating bigotry is just idiotic.

How is it "idotic" to say that a person should not be persecuted for having an unpopular opinion on a subject?

That is the problem. I did not say anything about persecution. I was saying people shouldn't show tolerance for bigotry, just because attempts at getting bigotry upheld in law fell through. I am not saying it'd be okay for people to harass the guy, or that he should get in trouble for it, but the fact that gay marriage is now allowed doesn't mean people should treat it like a sports game and go "Oh well, you guys lost, better luck next time".

It's akin to saying people who judge criminals are bigoted against criminals. You see, it's actually okay to be intolerant of people who do bad things.

I must have missed that day in class where it was a criminal offense to practice your right as an American citizen to vote for politicians and laws that match your views, regardless of whether or not your views were deemed "progressive". Perhaps you can help me out by providing a link where I can find these laws that make it illegal to vote based on conservative views.

Again, I said nothing about criminal offences. I was not saying the police or law enforcement should get involved in any shape or form. The right to free speech works both ways. People can express their views that gay people shouldn't marry, and people can tell those who think that to fuck off.

Freedom of speech means you cannot be prosecuted by law, it doesn't make you exempt from consequences.

 

[JetFury]

I can see why people say they separate the man from the belief, otherwise you'd have to deny a lot of services available to you now. I do consider him a bigot though.

For me it's as simple as buying it, but making sure the guy I disagree with doesn't get a cent for it. Buying used or acquiring online works fine. It's just like how if I ever buy a game cliffy b is involved with, it'll be used