Dear Orson Scott Card:

[yendi]

As you may or may not know (depending on whether you've ever taken the time to read my LJ, which I admit is unlikely), I'm straight when it comes to my sexual preferences.

That said, after reading your hate-filled pap, I think I can honestly say that I'd like you to suck my dick, any time you want. If anyone needs a penis in their mouth, it's you. There's also no doubt that you could benefit from some serious stimulation of your prostate.

Love,

Adam

Comments

[rainbow-slinky.livejournal.com]

Oh my god, I can't even bring myself to finish reading that.

[branwynelf.livejournal.com]

A homosexual can get the civil rights marriage accords by finding someone of the opposite sex to marry?! Did he really say that?!

Well yes Mr. Card, and those who are single and wishing to be married (and I can name several of my friends who fall in that catagory) could just go find any slob (of the opposite gender, mind you) and head for Las Vegas - but that doesn't mean it's right, that they should do so, or will in any way make for happy people.

Does he really have his head that far up his ass? Oy.

[unwilly.livejournal.com]

What an ass. SO glad I stopped buying his books.

He has a couple of good points, and an amazing slew of callous, stupid, vicious and wrong headed ones.

[moonfire77.livejournal.com]

I couldn't finish it either. It's amazing that someone who is smart enough to write the Ender series (which I loved) can be dumb enough to write that crap.

[olliesmama.livejournal.com]

*chokes* I just spewed Diet Coke all over my monitor....

[zeppo.livejournal.com]

my favorite part is where he refered to men seeking as many available women as possible to have intercourse with as "Clintonesque."

Was that the law of the land while Clinton was President? Paul is gonna be pissed that he missed that memo.

[aussie-nyc.livejournal.com]

That's what a lifetime of the right kind of religious education can do for you.

[trillian42.livejournal.com]

Isn't he Mormon? You know, that religion that allows men to "marry" multiple women, some of them under the age of consent and, infact, without consent?

Men in glass houses...

[moonfire77.livejournal.com]

Out of curiousity, do you know what his LJ name is? I'd be interested to see what else Mr. Card has to say.

[branwynelf.livejournal.com]

Actually they were forced to change that back when Utah was applying to become a state. Now it's officially not allowed, although is usually overlooked if done in Utah's outlying areas.

[trillian42.livejournal.com]

Don't know if he has an LJ, but here's his official webpage: http://hatrack.com/

[moonfire77.livejournal.com]

k thanks.

[nihilistic-kid.livejournal.com]

Naturalistic fallacy, check. Ad hominems, check. Stacking the deck, check. Bandwagon argument by extension (if democratically decided, the answer to gay marriage would be Card's and right), check.

That's in the first five paragraphs.

Final grade: F

eeeeeww.

[gev.livejournal.com]

you'd put your penis in that festering pie-hole?

What does Shadesong think of this?

[thefirethorn.livejournal.com]

Because no constitution in the United States has ever granted the courts the right to make vast, sweeping changes in the law to reform society.

Is that true? Did a court decide that abortion was legal? Didn't a court decide that making a little black kid walk half way across town to go to a black school when a perfectly nice white school right next to her was a BAD idea? Did that happen in my imagination?

[trillian42.livejournal.com]

Ah, ok.

[velvetknife.livejournal.com]

This from a man who wrote Songmaster, which is a rather lengthy book in which all of the sexual politics are pretty little boys and big powerful old men.

Mormons, man. That's all I'm saying.

[sibylla.livejournal.com]

yendi,

I love you. OSC, while he may be a fine writer, is a jackass. I've suspected it for years and years. If he does, indeed, take you up on your offer, can I be present? Video or a simple photograph would suffice, if not.

Thanks.

Your friend,
sibylla

[cissa.livejournal.com]

*applause* If I had a dick, I'd say, "Me, too."

[ladyortyger.livejournal.com]

*jaw on floor* Ok.. Card just lost any respect I had for him as the author of some of my most favorite books.

Had his argument not been riddled with fallacies and BS...

well..

Damn.

[pbristow.livejournal.com]

hate-filled pap,

Erm... You do realise that, with this reaction, you're actually lending weight to his argument (such as it is)?

Besides, I found it to be only semi-hate-filled. The top half sounded quite reasonable, in fact (I disagreed with it, but it was *reasonable*, given his apparent axioms). Just past the half-way mark was where it all turned very nasty...

Bugger. And I quite liked "Speaker for the Dead", too. =:o{

lethebasii

[galateadia.livejournal.com]

you could always just employ the use of a strap on...
i think that is route i will be taking. :)

[demetria23.livejournal.com]

Haha, my friend got into a real-life argument with OSC when we were both 16. He was one of my favorite authors at the time. Damn closed-minded Mormons.

[sage-and-sea.livejournal.com]

I can't even tell how disgusted I am by OSC, but your words have painted a pretty picture. *grin*

[astrophysicat.livejournal.com]

You know, I thought your response was inappropriately derogatory to homosexuals until I got to the part about homosexuality being an "adolescent sexuality" and then I realized, holy shit, not only is this man supressing his "natural desires" with regards to fucking every woman who can walk, but holy shit, he is a repressed homosexual.

He gives a bad name to anyone else trying to justify the "protection of marriage" because this is the most lucidly I've ever seen it explained, and this crap sucks. To pick on one minor fallacy amongst many, he's completely neglected the fact that homosexual couples can have children, even those that are biologically theirs...

[kaliwohi.livejournal.com]

I didn't really find it hate-filled. I actually agree with his thoughts on the idea that a major function of society is to order itself. I agree that the breakdown of the family structure is a major factor in the problems facing society today. I just disagree with his thoughts that homosexual marriage contributes to that breakdown. On the contrary, I feel that it will help to strengthen families.

He sits on one side of the debate, and I sit on the other. He has as much a right to his opinion as I have to mine. I don't agree with him, but I don't feel like he's any less respectable because of it.

And to anyone who feels the need to stop reading him because he said these things, how does that make you any different from the people who boycotted the Dixie Chicks because of their "unpatriotic" remarks or who banned books written by gay authors?

in blunt hetreo terms

[dgkgoldberg.livejournal.com]

i would not have sex with OSC with another woman's pussy

Further

[dgkgoldberg.livejournal.com]

OSC
pays for a newspaper in North Carolina, Rhino Times, that pretends to be a grass roots paper but is really only his rigid moralistic pulpit where he can attack people who have the insane idea that children need to eat even when their parents have holy ideas that say otherwise.

[amokk]

Technically they don't have the rights to make laws, however their job is to interpret laws.

And yes, a court did decide both those things. ;)

Which, in many cases, seems to the unenlightened as if they were making laws.

I still find it amusing that those who rail against the Rule of Law being broken (in San Francisco) are ok with it being broken in regards to the Full Faith and Credit Clause (it's in the Constitution and broken by the DOMA.. I've been typing this a lot lately ;) ).

[silme.livejournal.com]

Always remember that Card is a devout Mormon.

[trochee.livejournal.com]

amen to that. I got about four paragraphs in and had to stop. Grr...

[lovingboth]

And his latest outburst is a surprise? He's been doing this sort of thing for years.

I'm more surprised by the idea that the majority of straight men care about the gender of the person sucking them :)

Re: Further

[yendi]

Wow. I wasn't aware of that (The Rhino Times? Is there something about NC I'm missing?).


Glad to see he's funnelling his money so productively back into society, instead of going out and spending it on something silly like helping people.

[yendi]

I saw too many of his arguments as being fueled not by a differing opinion on defining marriage, but by an irrational fear and hatred of homosexuality (and as others have pointed out, it's extreme enough to suggest serious repression on his part).

As for the Dixie Chicks thing, I see no difference, nor do I see a problem. There's enough good art out there for me (or anyone) to decide not to support the folks I don't want to, based on things they've said in other forums. And I saw nothing wrong with folks deciding not to buy The Dixie Chicks stuff for the same reason (other than my disagreeing with their reasoning itself; but they were perfectly right to decide not to support someone they felt they disagreed with).

I see banning book as a totally different topic that simply violates the Constitution.

[rainbow-slinky.livejournal.com]

What's sad is, the one book of his that I have is on audio, so I can't even burn it.

[sff-corgi.livejournal.com]

I got 'pounced' on by a Mormon who was in a bad mood because she had to sleep under her lap desk; we've made up, but I figured as long as I said nasty things about Card's article, I had to back them up.

Therefore I annotated (to exorcise the thing). Bit my tounge real hard to keep from lapsing into fandom_wank-bashing-style sarcasm. Took 2 full LJ posts for the whole thing, with font-change to mark my comments eating up my character count.

So if anybody wants to spot-check my logic....