Slashdot Mirror
EA Defends Itself Against Thousands of Anti-Gay Letters
donniebaseball23 writes "Video game publisher Electronic Arts has not only had to defend itself against 'worst company in America' labels, but GamesIndustry International has revealed that EA's been receiving thousands of letters protesting the inclusion of same-sex relationship content in games like Mass Effect and Star Wars: The Old Republic. The campaign against EA appears to be led by Florida Family Association and the Family Research Council. The letters threaten to boycott purchase of EA games if the company won't remove the LGBT content, and many allege that EA was pressured by LGBT activists to include the content, which they say is forcing LGBT themes on children playing the games. 'This isn't about protecting children, it's about political harassment,' said Jeff Brown, VP of corporate communications."
Soddom
Are these bastards really going to make me side with EA on something? I need a shower.
Am, in the interests of balance, going to boycott EA games unless they have more lesbian content.
It's only fair after all.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
So: Being gay is wrong. Gays can't be open about their sexuality. Gays don't get the same rights as heterosexuals.
So yes, that absolutely does make you anti-gay.
Except it's not being promoted aside from how the public has taken it upon itself to run with it.
You don;t have to pursue the homosexual options in the game, they are optional.
*On a more personal note, if you against gays having the same rights (marriage) as straights, you kind of are by definition anti-gay.
"I'm not a misogynistic I just think woman should be kept in the kitchen."
"I'm not racist I just think blacks should have stayed on the plantations."
If it was strictly a matter of theology I would agree it should be up to the church, but so long as the insurance companies cannot insure a domestic partner, nor the government grant tax benefits to domestic partners, nor hospitals allow visitation to domestic partners; then it is a federal mater and the church should have zero say.
I believe homosexual acts are a sin. I believe homosexuality should not be promoted. I oppose gay marriage.
Does this make me anti-gay? No way. Hate the sin and love the sinner. We are all children of God.
By denying gay people respect and what they want - yes you are anti-gay
BTW being gay is natural. If not then why did God create all those gay animals? See Biological Exuberance:Homosexuality and Natural Diversity which lists the gay and bisexual nature of over 300 species as seen in the wild.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Far too many religious people define themselves by what they hate, and measure their own worth by how much hatred they can stir up.
Personally, I'd like to see all these hateful "Family" outfits treated the same way as other hate mongers that are currently dealt with harshly by law, like neo-Nazis and Islamists.
I believe homosexual acts are a sin.
Fine. Many people believe eating bacon is a sin.
I believe homosexuality should not be promoted.
Fine. I don't think boxing should be promoted. Doesn't seem to stop them.
I oppose gay marriage.
Here is where it is not-so fine. If you are actively trying to suppress two consensual adults from entering into a mutually beneficial contract because of their gender, you are anti-gay. Maybe you're ok with civil unions; that makes you less anti-gay and just deluded in believing that separate-but-equal will work this time.
no comment
Your bible does not say homosexuality is a sin. It just says "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." I interpret that to be an endorsement of anal sex or cunnilingus. You cant lie with a man as you would with a woman, the holes dont line up. And of course that same section of the book says you are going to hell for eating shell fish, for wearing linen and cotton at the same time and for not stoning to death a disobedient daughter.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Would eliminating privileges of marriage be better?
Well, it would be fairer.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
George Takei has offered up his name as an alternative to gay, so you can support Takei Marrage instead.
I have it on good authority (No, I can't reveal my source) that this is EA responding to being voted the worst company of 2012 by Consumerist.com. The higher-ups are worried about the bad press right before the stock holders meeting, so they are deliberately trying to spin the negative press as being tied to their support of LGBT. However it's pretty obvious that the voters at the Consumerist were much more focused on EA's price gouging and charging extra for downloadable content just to get the basic content, anti-competitive measures and a host of other issues.
So when you hear EA saying "They hate us because we're taking a stand for human rights", you know the truth is "They hate you because you mercilessly squeeze every dollar out of your customers, you provide horrid customer service and because you deliberately hold back game content as DLC, making the customers feel like they're being blackmailed instead of being consumers."
citing nature's activities as defense of homosexuality is entirely illogical.
I disagree. A lot of anti-gay stance is based round the concept that being gay is a choice and not a fundamental attribute. By showing that animals are gay as well means (among other things) that either God has given animals the ability to choose to be gay or not, or that being gay is natural.
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
That is such semantic nonsense. Heterosexuals have the right to marry the person they romantically love. Homosexuals do not have that right in most of the United States.
The real problem is that the word "marriage" has a religious meaning. I propose we remove the word from all federal, state, and local laws and documents, replacing it with civil unions (with rights and responsibilities identical to those currently attributed to marriage). All current marriages are automatically converted over to the (functionally identical) civil unions and any couple of legal age and standing (neither member already part of a civil union) may fill out the paper work and be legally joined. Leave the word marriage to mean "joined by a church"; which, of course, any couple, gay or straight, could also have performed as part of forming their civil union.
There, everyone has their religious freedoms, everyone has identical rights, everyone is happy right? Oh wait no, the religious wackos (and no, I don't mean that to be everyone who is religious is wacko) will throw an ever loving hissy fit, yelling at the top of their lungs that "the gays won" and "you're destroying marriage!".
Sure, then we can have switches for everything. It can default to all white male, then switches to add female, black, gay, atheist, muslim, disabled whatever. That way the people who live with their heads up their ass can pretend the rest of the world doesn't exist.
Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
Are these bastards really going to make me side with EA on something? I need a shower.
Just think of it as an EA PR story. Its not like ignoring thousands of letters is something new to them. Its just business as usual.
These same people rant and rave about Sharia Law coming to America, because they're worried it would move in on their turf.
Well, remember that religious people are incapable of logical reasoning.
As a "religious person," I feel entirely convinced you have logically come to this conclusion.
My bad, religious people are unable to accept reality as well.
As well as this. Well, this one makes sense, as long as you define reality as what you believe to be true; thus, anyone who thinks differently is denying reality.