Boycott due to opposing view

Crooked Jack · 07-03-2013 02:07PM

OP has a point here.
This man is entitled to his own personal opinions, regardless of how unpalatable they are.
Boycotting the product because one of the people involved happens to hold anti-gay marriage opinions is no better than boycotting the product because one of the people involved happens to be gay.
Once they are personally held opinions and not being shoehorned into the product itself in some way then it's really none of anybody's business

Benny_Cake · 07-03-2013 02:10PM

Links234 wrote: »

Exactly this, he's not just being boycotted because of his views, he's one of the big-wigs in the anti-gay movement.

If that's the case, it's a different matter, if you make yourself a spokesperson on either side of this debate some people will get upset, it comes with the territory. I was under the impression he had just expressed his personal opinion.

Carlos Orange · 07-03-2013 02:13PM

Benny_Cake wrote: »

If that's the case, it's a different matter, if you make yourself a spokesperson on either side of this debate some people will get upset, it comes with the territory. I was under the impression he had just expressed his personal opinion.

Is that basically don't ask don't tell for people who don't support gay marriage?

starlings · 07-03-2013 02:23PM

psinno wrote: »

Is that basically don't ask don't tell for people who don't support gay marriage?

I think it's actually don't ask don't marry someone of the same sex. :pac:

sbsquarepants · 07-03-2013 02:23PM

Pudders wrote: »

How can you "boycott" Superman?

You'd definitely need to start with kryptonite, after that who knows?

I have to say, i couldn't care less what his personaly beliefs are, i don't care if he's sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever - so long as he doesn't try incorporate them in the script.

Although it could be a good scene - 2 men, just about to tie the knot when the registrar asks, does any one know of any reason why these two men can not........ Off comes the roof and there's superman, setting things right with his anti homo laser eye beams of godliness. Fúck yeah.

Also it's quite ironic, i mean super man is gayer than louis spence bumming elton:D

krudler · 07-03-2013 02:28PM

I don't get it, unless the guy writes in some anti-gay marriage into the comic whats the difference? If you were to boycott any form of entertainment because someone involved had conflicting personal opinions to yours you'd never watch a film or listen to music again.

starlings · 07-03-2013 02:39PM

krudler wrote: »

I don't get it, unless the guy writes in some anti-gay marriage into the comic whats the difference? If you were to boycott any form of entertainment because someone involved had conflicting personal opinions to yours you'd never watch a film or listen to music again.

Broadly, I agree. I still like TS Eliot, despite the accusations that he was anti-semitic, and there are those who won't listen to Wagner for the same reason. I think any art should be above the opinions of the artist.

But what we have here is a new employee on a much loved franchise, a pen-for-hire who is also a publicly known organiser against gay marriage. The fans are invested in the ongoing Superman theme - not an original and unique work- and are thus more of a consumer force when it comes to the direction it takes.

Mr. CooL ICE · 07-03-2013 02:41PM

Meh. I'm sure there are US democrat supporters out there who appreciate Michael Bay movies

Ray Palmer · 07-03-2013 02:54PM

No matter what his views are he is a great writer. The organisation he is a memeber of has a particular view but simply calling it an anti-gay organisation is a half truth. Their stance is against gay marriage and adoption which is a view many people have. I disagree but it isn't like they are trying to kill or target gay people. They don't believe it is right which is a different view to mine. It is part of his religious view that he was raised with no different to Dana.

Benny_Cake · 07-03-2013 02:56PM

psinno wrote: »

Is that basically don't ask don't tell for people who don't support gay marriage?

I suppose it kind of is!

It cuts both ways, you can be pretty sure that if an activist who was in favour of gay marriage was in Card's position you'd probably have some organisation related to the religious right calling for a boycott too. It's what passes for activism these days, and the best thing is that you don't actually have to do anything. Probably achieves very little though aside from preventing an honest conversation.

markfinn · 07-03-2013 02:59PM

krudler wrote: »

I don't get it, unless the guy writes in some anti-gay marriage into the comic whats the difference? If you were to boycott any form of entertainment because someone involved had conflicting personal opinions to yours you'd never watch a film or listen to music again.

There's a sizable difference between "someone involved had conflicting personal opinions to yours" and "someone involved is a powerful and wealthy activist who spends their time and wealth attempting to deny basic human rights to a large minority of the human race".

hooradiation · 07-03-2013 03:03PM

On the plus side, we've already got a good idea of what the opening page of Orson Scott Cards superman run is going to be like.

Ray Palmer · 07-03-2013 03:15PM

markfinn wrote: »

There's a sizable difference between "someone involved had conflicting personal opinions to yours" and "someone involved is a powerful and wealthy activist who spends their time and wealth attempting to deny basic human rights to a large minority of the human race".

The claim it is a basic human right seems really starnge to me. It isn't and hasn't been a basic human right for many people through history. It has only been recently touted as this. Many people all around the world do not have this right of choice and it is insulting to suggest that only gay people in the western world have a special persecusion.

It is a new and understandable change to culture and I welcome it but it is not a human right. It sounds very like the right for men to have baby's from the Holy Grail when described as that. It is a major change.

starlings · 07-03-2013 03:29PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

The claim it is a basic human right seems really starnge to me. It isn't and hasn't been a basic human right for many people through history. It has only been recently touted as this. Many people all around the world do not have this right of choice and it is insulting to suggest that only gay people in the western world have a special persecusion.

It is a new and understandable change to culture and I welcome it but it is not a human right. It sounds very like the right for men to have baby's from the Holy Grail when described as that. It is a major change.

All established human rights are abstract; the idea of a right is a human construct, so tradition doesn't really come into it.

The UDHR is only in existence since 1948. It builds on historical advances in social justice and sets a framework for future applications of those rights - gay marriage being one of these developments. Human Rights are painstakingly established and appealed to in cases of injustice, not simply set up because one group feels like it, as you seem to suggest. Though I can't really blame you, given the way many people throw the word around.

It's also important to remember that rights do not exist in isolation; they must be argued and balanced against each other, e.g. freedom of conscience vs (potential) right to marry in the case of homophobia.

johnr1 · 07-03-2013 03:35PM

So the conclusion here appears to be that people are right to boycott this guy's work because he is anti-gay marriage?

Yet, a couple of weeks ago, I was told here that I was taking 'needless offence' - (thats a paraphrased distillation) when I said I'd be boycotting Django Unchained because its lead actor Jsmie Foxx is a racist.

The difference here appears to me to be that gay marriage is "in" and that racism unless by a white person is "out"

DeanAustin · 07-03-2013 03:37PM

The fella is entitled to an opinion. His Superman work has nothing to do with it. Nonsense boycotting his work over this.

Mickeroo · 07-03-2013 03:42PM

I only just realised why his name was familiar to me, he wrote Ender's Game too. Have that sitting in my room next on my reading list.

hooradiation · 07-03-2013 03:48PM

johnr1 wrote: »

So the conclusion here appears to be that people are right to boycott this guy's work because he is anti-gay marriage?

No, the conclusion is that people place different emphasis on different things and some people don't find Jamie Foxxs opinion in the same league as the man who has called for the overthrowing of the US government if they dare to legalise gay marriage.

But please, you were feeling put upon and i'd hate to ruin your pity party.

Ray Palmer · 07-03-2013 03:56PM

Mickeroo wrote: »

I only just realised why his name was familiar to me, he wrote Ender's Game too. Have that sitting in my room next on my reading list.

It's really good, I am on Ender's Shadow at the moment

Shenshen · 07-03-2013 04:02PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

There is currently a bit of a storm in the world of Superman. A very well known sci-fi writer is to write a mini series on superman. The problem is the guy is a Mormon and has expressed opposition to gay marriage. So now people are boycotting superman or threatening to.

Now I am happy to allow gay marriage. I also think boycotting companies is a good plan if it is the companies actions. But a hired writer being the target like this bothers me. It just seems very oppressive and even discriminatory. What are others views?

He's free to write whatever he likes, and to hold any opinion he likes.

Everybody else is free to make their own decisions on where and how to spend their money.
People getting hounded out of business over their convictions is one of the darker sides of capitalism, unfortunately.

Madam_X · 07-03-2013 04:27PM

Crooked Jack wrote: »

OP has a point here.
This man is entitled to his own personal opinions, regardless of how unpalatable they are.
Boycotting the product because one of the people involved happens to hold anti-gay marriage opinions is no better than boycotting the product because one of the people involved happens to be gay.
Once they are personally held opinions and not being shoehorned into the product itself in some way then it's really none of anybody's business

That's what I was thinking initially, not knowing about the guy, but then read posts after mine, which are by people who know about the man, and he is clearly very publicly anti-gay, which has far bigger implications than him merely holding an anti gay marriage opinion.

Ray Palmer · 07-03-2013 04:59PM

Madam_X wrote: »

That's what I was thinking initially, not knowing about the guy, but then read posts after mine, which are by people who know about the man, and he is clearly very publicly anti-gay, which has far bigger implications than him merely holding an anti gay marriage opinion.

Strangely in employment law here you can't lose you job for campaigning for your beliefs. This is an attempt to sack a guy for his belief. Change it to a person campaigning for any moral cause that is popular and you see the problem.
Opposing gay marriage and adoption and saying it is anti- gay kind of bothers me. I don't oppose it myself but I know people who do and they aren't anti- gay. Things are not black and white. If you are actually Roman Catholic you also are against the same. If you aren't you aren't Roman Catholic.

allibastor · 07-03-2013 05:09PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

There is currently a bit of a storm in the world of Superman. A very well known sci-fi writer is to write a mini series on superman. The problem is the guy is a Mormon and has expressed opposition to gay marriage. So now people are boycotting superman or threatening to.

Now I am happy to allow gay marriage. I also think boycotting companies is a good plan if it is the companies actions. But a hired writer being the target like this bothers me. It just seems very oppressive and even discriminatory. What are others views?

To be fair, the last few american presidents have been against Gay marrige. didnt mean that people bouycotted the country.

Nodin · 07-03-2013 09:56PM

The OP is rather misleading, in that it gives the impression that Card is a man who has said that he's against gay marriage and thats the problem. Theres rather more to it than that.

starlings · 07-03-2013 09:56PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Strangely in employment law here you can't lose you job for campaigning for your beliefs. This is an attempt to sack a guy for his belief. Change it to a person campaigning for any moral cause that is popular and you see the problem.
Opposing gay marriage and adoption and saying it is anti- gay kind of bothers me. I don't oppose it myself but I know people who do and they aren't anti- gay. Things are not black and white. If you are actually Roman Catholic you also are against the same. If you aren't you aren't Roman Catholic.

This is an attempt to get the company to sack the writer (or more likely, not to renew the contract) by hitting them in the pocket and corporate image.

I don't mean to be pedantic - it's just freelancers don't enjoy the same protection as employees, so their off-contract activities do matter to their reputations.

Annasopra · 08-03-2013 01:20AM

Nodin wrote: »

The OP is rather misleading, in that it gives the impression that Card is a man who has said that he's against gay marriage and thats the problem. Theres rather more to it than that.

Such as?

Nodin · 08-03-2013 05:27AM

mango salsa wrote: »

Such as?

....hes got it in for homosexuality generally, writes discourses on same, and is on the board of the National Organization for Marriage, which campaigns against gay marriage.

Ruudi_Mentari · 08-03-2013 05:55AM

Nicholas Cage's most reluctant photo-call

Carlos Orange · 08-03-2013 12:02PM

Nodin wrote: »

....hes got it in for homosexuality generally, writes discourses on same, and is on the board of the National Organization for Marriage, which campaigns against gay marriage.

So you can have an opinion as long as it has zero impact on your life and you do nothing about it.

Crooked Jack · 08-03-2013 12:24PM

Madam_X wrote: »

That's what I was thinking initially, not knowing about the guy, but then read posts after mine, which are by people who know about the man, and he is clearly very publicly anti-gay, which has far bigger implications than him merely holding an anti gay marriage opinion.

But regardless of how extreme his views are or what campaigning he is involved in on his own time, as long as that isnt seeping into the product he is helping to produce I fail to see how it warrants a boycott or costing a man his job. It's no better than homophobes boycotting a company because one worker happens to be gay.

Boycott due to opposing view

Comments