Slashdot Mirror
Orson Scott Card Pleads 'Tolerance' For Ender's Game Movie
interval1066 writes "A story in Wired describes Orson Scott Card's quest for tolerance in response to a boycott for Gavin Hood's film adaption of Ender's Game, saying that 'The gay marriage issue is moot' in a statement to Entertainment Weekly. Card is a long time anti-gay and defense of marriage activist. 'His concern, ostensibly, is that someone might be petty enough not to see his movie simply because he spent years lobbying for laws that treated certain people as less than human. The fallacy he employs here — that calling out hate-speech is intolerance on par with curtailing the human rights of others — is a favorite fallback of cowards and bullies, and a way of evading responsibility for the impact of their words and actions.' I guess he didn't see this film and the box-office importance of wide appeal coming, did he?"
Seriously - asking the Left to be open-minded or tolerant is silly.
The Left has a fascist agenda that they want to jam down people's throats, in the EXACT same sense that the Right does, they've just been far better at packaging it.
"No, no, WE are about freedom and human rights. THEY are about repression. See how clear that is?"
Think I'm joking?
Check with your local Leftist activist friend. They are militantly in favor of the rights of homosexuals. Fair enough, it's a good point. Mention that people against the rights of gays are backwards hicks that should be completely ignored and shunned by anyone with a brain, you'll likely get firm agreement...as long as you're talking about (white) Republicans/Evangelicals.
If you change the context, and mention that conservative Muslims should likewise be completely shunned from consideration because they are even more homophobic, MURDERING gay men for their choices, suddenly culture and context is an exonerating factor.
Back to the OP, though, OSC needs ot understand that the Streisand Effect is at work here. The media is against him, so any attention called to the subject will generate only negative publicity.
He needs to shut up, and understand that the spirit of McCarthy is live and well here in the US, he's just wearing a "YES WE CAN" t-shirt this year, and drives a Prius.
-Styopa
Not saying it is right or wrong on the issue of gay marriage, but ... ...
Technically
Gay or straight the rights are equal. Men and Women can marry a member of the opposite sex.
Straight men can not marry straight men, and gay men can not marry gay men. Therefore it is "Equal Treatment".
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
I cannot, in good conscience, support a work, however good, that would lead to harm to others' civil rights.
Another argument that is built on the foundation that "gay rights are civil rights". When and how did gay rights become civil rights? What widely accredited, factual basis is this built upon?
Even in 2013 there's still no widely accredited evidence that says people are "born gay", have a "gay gene", etc., but that doesn't matter anymore because that old argument - which can't be won by gay activists - has been buried in a shroud of bigorty.
Don't think so? Try and answer the questions above with facts (not "truth"), without resorting to the "civil rights" argument. While some may respond with fringe arguments like "look at the gay monkeys" or quoting some flawed study that is never widely accepted by science, just about all responses eventually filter down to the following: "Gay rights are a civil right because people never made a choice that led them to become gay. It's just who they are. Therefore, they should be accepted as equals on every social level and in all social institutions - without any tags or flags labeling them as 'different'. If you don't think so, you're a bigot/moron/idiot/religiousnutjob that needs to get educated or shut the hell up."
In the end, IMO, gay activists aren't pushing for "civil rights" - that's just their legal tool they've employed. Instead, they want something much more basic: They just want to feel normal/accepted/loved for "who they are". They just want to "normalize" their lives - and if that requires stripping off social mores that clash with that feeling of normalcy, they will attack them, slowly - 24/7 - for as long as it takes, until they've wiped those "hateful" mores out of existence or placed such a strong taboo on them that they marginalize those who use them in the same extreme manner they've been shunned/hated/attacked by societies for millenia.
Anyone truly concerned about "civil rights" and "freedoms" would never take that fascist tact that many here on this board are taking, with many viciously attacking Mr. Card directly vs. responding to his points.
BTW - I have a theory as to why society shifted on the issue so far and quickly over the last 15-20 years.
Americans suddenly become more educated, smarter, wiser, and/or more compassionate over the last 15-20 years (according to various studies on education, etc.)
The Internet itself has made the world much smaller, opening up people's minds to other societies, mores, etc. However, many people tend to listen to those of their own viewpoint vs. listening to and considering others.
The spread of pornography online likely changed social mores about all kinds of sexuality for some, but that still can't account 20% worth of shift in less than 20 years. Besides, porn has been around for millenia w/o ever causing a shift nearly as seismic as this - regardless of the powers of the Internet.
IMO, the reason is much more basic - popularity and peer pressure. After all of the pro-gay pushing by various people in society and media it finally reached critical mass, making opposing gay marriage the "uncool" stance to take. Those that didn't have a strong opinion have jumped on the more popular side of the issue just to be cool and not cause any trouble.