The Federal Prop. 8 Trial / Gay Marriage Catch-All

I was wondering, from our international GWJERS, are OS Card books available for sale in nations with strong hate speech laws like say Germany, or Belgium?

NormanTheIntern wrote:

But that creates a system where artists should only express popular opinions or face economic penury.

No it doesn't, it is an affect that pushes the system in that direction, and in the absence of any other factors, yes, the system may head somewhere like that. One such factor that pushes back is that people want things, so you have to dislike the message more than you want the product. This is why you don't hear about anyone boycotting people who don't think that Squirtle is the best original starting Pokemon, even though those people are obviously wrong.

Put aside for a moment where you stand on this particular issue - shouldn't the artist's work (or anyone's, really) stand separate from their political beliefs or motivations? Unless the subject of that work is inherently political.

I can't put aside my views, as that's the whole point. If I thought homosexuals didn't deserve the rights that heterosexuals had I'd be fine. If I didn't care I'd be fine, if I only cared a little I'd be fine. However I really, really think that homosexuals should be treated equally, that's the whole point.

Now if someone felt really strongly in the other direction, they could boycott too. I don't think that Orson Scott Card should be legally mandated to watch Ellen Degeneres to avoid "unfair judgement of her work" based on her identity. He's still wrong, but he has the same right to share and support his wrong opinions as I have to share my correct opinions. He can boycott me while he's at it.

I totally can judge his works on their own merits at the same time. I actually really, really like Ender's Game, but purchasing things, especially non-essentials, doesn't have to be so simple. Just like I may buy an indie game that is flawed and unpolished because I like the fact that it exists, the developers, and hope for better in the future, I can also not choose to buy something good because I feel negative about parts of the surrounding system.

Put aside for a moment where you stand on this particular issue - shouldn't the artist's work (or anyone's, really) stand separate from their political beliefs or motivations? Unless the subject of that work is inherently political.

Shouldn't the artist have to think that their own public actions (or leaked private actions) can have consequences? Said it before, I'll say it again... Freedom of Speech is not Freedom from Consequences. Part of being an artist is selling your work, and if people consider you unlikable, well then you fail at that part of being an artist.

Would it be nice if human beings were designed not to think ill-things of others based on past actions? Well, given that we might actually be an extinct species that never learned to remember things instinctually that could cause us harm or make us feel bad... no, it wouldn't.

Homo Habilis didn't boycott and look what happened to them.

Yonder wrote:

Homo Habilis didn't boycott and look what happened to them.

I can't tell if you're mocking my joke point or piling on with my joke point.

Demosthenes wrote:
Yonder wrote:

Homo Habilis didn't boycott and look what happened to them.

I can't tell if you're mocking my joke point or piling on with my joke point. :)

I honestly don't know either, I like ambiguous statements because then I don't have to!

"Leave 'em laughing, or leave 'em wondering what the hell you meant." -- Mark Twain

(one of my favorite quotes)

Card is a horrible human being.
That said I love Ender's game. May have been the timing of when I first read it but I like it.

However, I thought the previews were enough reason to not see the movie. Add Card to the picture and I can't understand why anyone would go.

Aside: I didn't get any homosexual tension out of the short story or book.

Also did I mention that Orson Scott Card is a horrible human being?

My original plan was to offset seeing the movie with 2:1 donations to pro-LGBT causes, but maybe I'll just try to find some alternative way to see the movie.

I'm with realityhack - Ender's Game was a formative book for me, I didn't get any homosexual tension out of it, and I think that OSC has become a horrible person.

I hope this doesn't come off as over-dramatic, but you can't offset suicide. There's a lot more to homophobia than not being allowed to marry in some states.

I've lately been avoiding the works of Tim Burton, because while in my youth I found them compelling, I've lately found them to be not worth my time.

AN-Y-ways, amusing as the NtI Show is, I come here shocked, aghast, and more than a little confounded. I live in Utah, home of Prop 8 moneybags the LDS Church, and work for a company headed by the most dedicated, cliched, false-smiling member of that group this side of Mitt, and I believe, barring some legal backdoors and whatnot about Legal Dependents, yes I believe my workplace just extended insurance to domestic partners at our big company rally. They at least did enough to make a straight boy ignorant of all the loopholes say "Holy sh*t...did he just extend insurance benefits to domestic partners!?" and the president mumbled through that slide fast enough to make me think it's so. Imagine you've dealt with things falling up your whole life, and you've been to other places where things fall down, and you have to say "Yeah, well, it's awesome that happens here, but where I come from, things will be falling up for a few decades," but all of the sudden you get a hint that maybe, just maybe, things might fall down around you too. I wish I'd committed the slide to memory so experts could dissect it, but I was too busy doing a spit take.

NormanTheIntern wrote:

I guess from my perspective, a politician running for president on a one woman/one man platform seems like it would have a much more direct affect on Rav/Ed's marriage than supporting or not supporting a sci fi movie, and therefore a more logical lever.

Except for the fact that Card is more than just someone who donates money to the National Organization for Marriage. He is a member of the governing board of that group. And NOM has been the unquestionable leader in trying to forcibly annul my marriage simply because they can't stomach the idea that two men are having sex. Any dollar I deprive from Card is potentially one dollar that won't be used against me or my husband. However, if I do nothing, say nothing, and just act as though Card has no influence, then I know for a fact that Card will continue to give even more generously to NOM.

NormanTheIntern wrote:

But that creates a system where artists should only express popular opinions or face economic penury. Put aside for a moment where you stand on this particular issue - shouldn't the artist's work (or anyone's, really) stand separate from their political beliefs or motivations? Unless the subject of that work is inherently political. This bleeds into the facebook/twitter retribution discussion we had awhile back for me.

Card isn't someone with a garden variety opposition to some government policy, though. Card specifically indicated that he was willing to burn the republic to the ground rather than have to accept a nation where gay marriage was accepted. (Of course, he turned out to be nothing more than a gutless, cowardly gasbag that is currently begging to be treated with kindness now that the public shift in attitudes toward gay marriage places him in a distinct minority.)

You will have to forgive me, Norman, if I find it highly unlikely that you would be racing to the bookstore to purchase my latest treatise on Christian mysticism if I was standing atop my roof with a sawed-off shotgun threatening to kill children until conservative Arizona embraces gay marriage and Sheriff Joe Arpaio agrees to officiate at the first gay marriage in the Grand Canyon State.

Seriously. This is just pathetic.

The people behind California's Proposition 8 have launched a new legal effort to stop the state from permitting same-sex marriages.

It's a long shot, but it gets at an issue that has been lurking in the legal dispute all along. The question is whether they've gone to the right place to get it resolved.

...

Their reasoning: When the U.S. Supreme Court booted the case, it left intact a 2010 ruling by U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker that found Prop. 8 unconstitutional. Walker issued an order -- directed to California's governor, attorney general and state officials who oversee county clerks -- barring them "and all persons under their control or supervision" from enforcing Prop. 8.

But Walker, the Prop. 8 proponents argue, lacked legal authority to order state officials to do anything except allow the four gay plaintiffs to get married. And even if he did have that authority, they say, county clerks are not under anyone's supervision when it comes to issuing marriage licenses because the California Legislature gave clerks -- and clerks alone -- the authority to issue them.

Yup. They want a STATE court to void a FEDERAL court decision.

These people are beyond contempt.

It's pure desperation driving that filing, hon. I can't even see the State court giving them the time of day right now, much less even thinking about taking this case on.

Although Rubb Ed and I are still celebrating the SCOTUS decisions on Prop. 8 and DOMA, we still face the grim reality that plenty of people in the gay community face life in states that don't have marriage equality.

That fact hit me square in the face today when I read this story about a gay couple in Ohio - Jim and John - who had a huge hurdle to clear to get to Maryland in order to get married: John has advanced ALS.

In order to get things squared away, Jim had to fly to Maryland to get the marriage license (MD is one of the few states that doesn't require both parties show up to get the license), then fly back to Ohio. Then, they needed over $12,000 (yes, twelve thousand!) to charter a plane to get from Cincinnati to Baltimore due to the special care John needed. Thankfully, social media played a role in raising the money and they were able to get to Baltimore three days ago. Upon landing and taxiing to the tarmac, Jim and John were married on the plane by John's aunt. Within 30 minutes, they were back in the air and on their way back to Ohio where they were greeted by friends and family.

Although it was a joyous occasion to be sure, it still is bittersweet. Straight couples can leisurely walk into any courthouse in any county in any state in the U.S., plunk down their money and walk out with a marriage license. Meanwhile, Jim and John had to spend thousands and thousands of dollars just for the privilege of being married.

And their home state won't even recognize their marriage.

(You can access the video here. I suggest plenty of tissues.)

Phoenix Rev wrote:

Although Rubb Ed and I are still celebrating the SCOTUS decisions on Prop. 8 and DOMA, we still face the grim reality that plenty of people in the gay community face life in states that don't have marriage equality.

That fact hit me square in the face today when I read this story about a gay couple in Ohio - Jim and John - who had a huge hurdle to clear to get to Maryland in order to get married: John has advanced ALS.

In order to get things squared away, Jim had to fly to Maryland to get the marriage license (MD is one of the few states that doesn't require both parties show up to get the license), then fly back to Ohio. Then, they needed over $12,000 (yes, twelve thousand!) to charter a plane to get from Cincinnati to Baltimore due to the special care John needed. Thankfully, social media played a role in raising the money and they were able to get to Baltimore three days ago. Upon landing and taxiing to the tarmac, Jim and John were married on the plane by John's aunt. Within 30 minutes, they were back in the air and on their way back to Ohio where they were greeted by friends and family.

Although it was a joyous occasion to be sure, it still is bittersweet. Straight couples can leisurely walk into any courthouse in any county in any state in the U.S., plunk down their money and walk out with a marriage license. Meanwhile, Jim and John had to spend thousands and thousands of dollars just for the privilege of being married.

And their home state won't even recognize their marriage.

(You can access the video here. I suggest plenty of tissues.)

Really... really just pisses me off that fellow residents of my city had to do this kind of thing. but the suburbs of the city have a lot of money committed to conservatism and tea party politics.

Glad they were able to get married... really pisses of me off that the state refuses to recognize their marriage... but doesn't really surprise me when this is a state that refused free money from the federal government to expand medicaid on principle.

The California Supreme Court officially told the Prop. 8 supporters to go pound sand as they were not going to stop gay marriage from happening in the Golden State.

The California Supreme Court refused a request by backers of Proposition 8 to reinstate the measure, which banned gay marriage, after they lost a fight in nation’s highest court to block same-sex weddings.

Proposition 8 backers filed a petition July 12 and asked the state’s high court to order county clerks to enforce the gay-marriage ban, claiming the measure was still valid because a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month didn’t find it was unconstitutional. They asked for an immediate injunction reinstating the law while the lawsuit is pending.

I give it two weeks before Prop. 8 supporters file a pleading in some court somewhere begging for an injunction.

Why? Because they can.

----------

It looks like by Friday at this time, England and Wales will have marriage equality.

The House of Lords had its third reading of the marriage equality bill and had some technical amendments that it sent back to the House of Commons. There seems to be no problems with those technical changes, so the Commons will accept them, provide a final reading and vote, and then will wait for Her Royal Majesty Queen Elizabeth II to issue her royal assent, which is seen as a formality.

Gosh, it's really odd to realize that just five years ago, the Rev. Rick Warren was riding high in this country. He was hosting presidential debates and lecturing us all on how same-sex marriage was going to doom us all since gay marriage is just like incest or polygamy.

But Warren doesn't get much press these days, but he still has a few zinger left inside of him, like when he Tweeted these lovely bits of wisdom:

IMAGE(http://www.feastinginphoenix.com/images/rickwarrentweet.JPG)

Let's deal with the first. Of course it matters. History will forever remember that the anti-abolitionists, the anti-suffragettes, the segregationists, the people who supported anti-miscegenation laws, and on and on were on the wrong side of history. One doesn't have to invoke George Santayana to know the importance of history, but Warren wants to dismiss it in lieu of truth as though you have to pick one or the other. But as for truth, Warren is on very shaky ground. The notion (which is what Warren is suggesting) that the Bible contains an understanding of the psycho-sexual development of sexual orientation and, therefore, the "truth" it contains about homosexuality is clear and undeniable is absurd.

As for Warren's second tweet, Warren sets up a huge straw man. Who is saying that truth or what is right is determined by popularity or polls? Segregation has always been wrong even when the public supported it. But Warren's tweet would have been a bit more poignant, brave, and daring if he had made it about, oh, five years ago when only two states had gay marriage, the President didn't support gay marriage, and no state had affirmed gay marriage at the ballot box.

Now it just comes across as sour grapes.

Sadly, that may be Rick Warren's legacy.

Rick Warren, Mega-tool wrote:

I'm not winning anymore so I'm going to cry about it and claim I'm better than everyone else... because that's clearly what Jesus wants me to do while I continue spewing hate speech.

My snarky reply back to that second tweet would be something along the lines of

McIrish's snarky twitter reply wrote:

Wait, I'm confused - so you now support gay marriage because you realize you've been using the bible to promote bigotry and hatred?

McIrishJihad wrote:

My snarky reply back to that second tweet would be something along the lines of

McIrish's snarky twitter reply wrote:

Wait, I'm confused - so you now support gay marriage because you realize you've been using the bible to promote bigotry and hatred?

If I had any non-SR4 money to spend, I would spend it convincing you to post that.

This growing conceit that people who are against marriage equality are some downtrodden minority bravely campaigning against unfair, misguided public opinion is... I dunno. Dumb. These people who can post these things and get in front of crowds and say this stuff without any real* fear of being beaten within an inch of their life or just brutally killed really have zero concept of what they're talking about. While I don't think the violence is as bad as it used to be, these folks really just have no idea what persecution is.

(*first one to make an argument about how "this one time..." somehow compares to decades of violent history against homosexuals wins!)

This one time i lost an arm wrestling match to a pre op trans lesbian. I screamed misandry and went directly to church.

There is a minority opinion, and then there is flat out wrong. Speaking of, is the flat earth society a brave group of minority view-holders fighting the tyranny of the majority? Or are they just crazy and wrong?

The Downtrodden Minority of Hate notion having been ensconced in official record in Scalia's minority dissent. I'm not going to lie, I'm going to show some real, possibly scary, almost surely in poor taste glee when he dies. I mean, after we find the last horcrux.

Lionsgate responds to calls to boycott Ender's Game:

As proud longtime supporters of the LGBT community, champions of films ranging from Gods and Monsters to The Perks of Being a Wallflower and a company that is proud to have recognized same-sex unions and domestic partnerships within its employee benefits policies for many years, we obviously do not agree with the personal views of Orson Scott Card and those of the National Organization for Marriage. However, they are completely irrelevant to a discussion of Ender’s Game. The simple fact is that neither the underlying book nor the film itself reflect these views in any way, shape or form. On the contrary, the film not only transports viewers to an entertaining and action-filled world, but it does so with positive and inspiring characters who ultimately deliver an ennobling and life-affirming message. Lionsgate will continue its longstanding commitment to the LGBT community by exploring new ways we can support LGBT causes and, as part of this ongoing process, will host a benefit premiere for Ender’s Game.

Personally I think that if they were so pro-LGBT, they wouldn't have done business with a screaming bigot like Card in the first place. Sometimes you just can't separate art from its creator.

Nevin73 wrote:

Lionsgate responds to calls to boycott Ender's Game:

As proud longtime supporters of the LGBT community, champions of films ranging from Gods and Monsters to The Perks of Being a Wallflower and a company that is proud to have recognized same-sex unions and domestic partnerships within its employee benefits policies for many years, we obviously do not agree with the personal views of Orson Scott Card and those of the National Organization for Marriage. However, they are completely irrelevant to a discussion of Ender’s Game. The simple fact is that neither the underlying book nor the film itself reflect these views in any way, shape or form. On the contrary, the film not only transports viewers to an entertaining and action-filled world, but it does so with positive and inspiring characters who ultimately deliver an ennobling and life-affirming message. Lionsgate will continue its longstanding commitment to the LGBT community by exploring new ways we can support LGBT causes and, as part of this ongoing process, will host a benefit premiere for Ender’s Game.

Personally I think that if they were so pro-LGBT, they wouldn't have done business with a screaming bigot like Card in the first place. Sometimes you just can't separate art from its creator.

They're actually putting money into his hands, which is going straight into anti-LGBT organizations. f*ck them and f*ck this rationalization.

SixteenBlue wrote:

They're actually putting money into his hands, which is going straight into anti-LGBT organizations. f*ck them and f*ck this rationalization.

Basically my take as well. I'll support all the other things that you guys do, but not ones that are giving money to OSC.

Lionsgate does have pro-LGBT history so it's not as if the claim is baseless. The apology is still crap. If I give you a piece of cake and break your nose, you're still going to be pissed about the broken nose.

RoughneckGeek wrote:

Lionsgate does have pro-LGBT history so it's not as if the claim is baseless. The apology is still crap. If I give you a piece of cake and break your nose, you're still going to be pissed about the broken nose.

I think it'd be a much better apology if they also gave an amount equal to whatever Card is getting to LGBT groups. It wouldn't make up for it completely, but it'd help some.