Quantcast
Family

Some in LGBT community to boycott 'Ender's Game' film

Comments

Return To Article
  • Uncle Rico Provo, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:05 p.m.

    Just bought 10 tickets to Ender's Game.

    Going to eat at Chick-fil-A before the movie.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:12 p.m.

    I'll go see the movie twice in support of him!

  • bsteve3 Lakewood, CO
    July 9, 2013 4:13 p.m.

    I think that Orson Scott Card's comments in response to this controversy were well said.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    I haven't seen a movie in a theater in more than 10 years and had not planned on seeing this one. But, given the actions of the boycott activists and to strike a blow for freedom of thought and expression, I guess I'll have to now. Just for good measure, I'll also drop by Chik-fil-a for a sandwich on the way to the theater.

  • Clarissa Layton, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:26 p.m.

    I'll buy tickets for myself and my friends. It's a wonderful book. I don't agree with a lot of things those in entertainment say, but I don't boycott a good movie.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 9, 2013 4:30 p.m.

    The one and only book of his I have ever read was Seventh Son - which is basically 1st Nephi with a very few slight changes.

    I have never seen any reason to read another of his books and I see no reason to see this movie.

  • Eliot Santaquin, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:34 p.m.

    Dang. I wasn't planning on watching this movie until now.

  • SoCal Andy Thousand Oaks, CA
    July 9, 2013 4:46 p.m.

    Hadn't planned on attending the movie, but will take the entire family now.

  • Ernest T. Zass Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:46 p.m.

    I'm not big on going to movie theaters, but I will take my family to this movie. If there is merchandise, my children will enjoy an Ender's Game-themed Christmas at my home in December. When it comes out on Netflix, I will let it stream constantly.

  • SammyB Provo, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    I will go see Ender's Game for the enjoyment and to make a statement toward those who do not believe others have a right to disagree with them. Agreeing to disagree is becoming a lost art.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    July 9, 2013 4:50 p.m.

    This is the beauty of living in a free and democratic country.

    Mr. Card has the right to express his opinion. Others have the right to act and boycott Mr. Card's products. People in general may join the boycott, boycott the boycott, or just ignore the boycott.

    Personally, I have never read anything by this gentleman. Therefore, it will easy for me not to support him economically.

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:50 p.m.

    Just a preview of what active LDS and other religious folks can expect as the tide shifts and the LGBTQ community strikes back against those who don't like their collective behavior. Other than scripture, I've read Ender's Game more times than any other book and like others will not only go to the theater (ugh) to see it, but will encourage everyone I know to do the same.

    It ain't gonna be pretty.

  • dhsalum Saint George, UT
    July 9, 2013 4:55 p.m.

    "we are free not to subsidize his bigoted lifestyle”

    The guy made a comment 23 years ago, yet his entire lifestyle is 'bigoted'. Once again, anyone who believes homosexuality is wrong is a bigot, no questions asked.

  • mbenfield Wooster, OH
    July 9, 2013 4:56 p.m.

    I find it so interesting that we who are opposed are not allowed to voice our opinions/feelings.
    So, let the homosexuals (as they should be called)boycott all they want. They seem to forget they are the minority.
    Those of us who believe marriage is ordained of God, specifically: one male, one female, are tired and fed up having their rants, parades, leanings, litigating shoved down our throats.
    If all were truly tolerant, all would allow all to voice opinions without backlash, threats, tantrums and the like.
    You go Scott! Hang tough!

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    July 9, 2013 4:58 p.m.

    Is there a word for LGBTs who are phobic of anyone who opposes their lifestyle? I think we need one.

  • Ironmomo Ogden, Utah
    July 9, 2013 5:00 p.m.

    Ben Kingsley and Harrison Ford...can't be that bad. I'll make it my Day After Turkey Day Movie.

  • LelandTC West Valley City, 00
    July 9, 2013 5:01 p.m.

    It is interesting how some people who claim intolerance in others can be quite intolerant themselves. If you want to get rid of a social divide, this is not the way to do it. Tell your opinion, your story, but don't try to force and punish those who differ in opinion from you to change how they think. If your story hits a chord, people will change. If you have to force people to come around to your way of thinking, then your way of thinking must be either flawed or poorly presented.

  • Spider Rico Greeley, CO
    July 9, 2013 5:06 p.m.

    Opposite effect gonna make this film huge. Can't wait to see it and that has nothing to do with my position on homosexuality. I'll go see the movie and listen to some Elton John on the way to the theater.

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    July 9, 2013 5:09 p.m.

    Not surprising again that Deseret News leaves out pertinent information. We're getting used to the convenient omissions of this paper. OSC didn't just make a few remarks, he sits on the board of the National Organization for Marriage (as does a member of the News' Editorial Advisory Board.) This organization has spent millions trying to deny fellow American's civil rights. They have operated in deceptive ways and have lost many a court battle trying to disobey the laws of States in which they've campaigned, yet they still refuse to obey the laws. We refuse to give money to a man who will turn around and use it against our rights. Would you if it were you?

  • SSmith Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:23 p.m.

    For a group that calls for tolerance, they sound pretty intolerant.

  • jcobabe Provo, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:28 p.m.

    Ender's Game has nothing whatsoever to say about "LGBT" issues. And Orson Scott Card has as much right to express an opinion as anyone else. Those whom this offends, please feel free to miss what promises to an epic film drama.

  • Civil Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:37 p.m.

    DanO,

    You failed to mention that "The law of the State of California" was changed by a majority vote of the people, but an activist gay judge and an activist government (refusing to defend the will of the people as voiced in a legal election) disobeyed the people.

    Many of those against gay marriage are not against gay rights -- they support all rights short of marriage, i.e., right of inheritance, right to work, right to equal housing, right of visitation, etc.

    But you are right. Pandora's box is now open. We'll see what comes next. Two men and a woman; two women and a man; two men and two women; a man and a boy; first cousins; siblings; parent-child. What is the rational for denying any of those now? None are any more unimaginable than homosexual marriage was 50 years ago.

  • LVIS Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:43 p.m.

    From Ted's Head--Just a preview of what active LDS and other religious folks can expect as the tide shifts and the LGBTQ community strikes back against those who don't like their collective behavior.

    Just a preview? What makes you think this sort of thing hasn't been going on for some time? Let them 'strike back'. I guess they're striking back the same way the Mormons do against those who don't like their collective behavior.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:44 p.m.

    DanO--We refuse to give money to a man who will turn around and use it against our rights. Would you if it were you?

    Yep. Planning on it.

  • John Galt Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:46 p.m.

    DanO--We're getting used to the convenient omissions of this paper.

    And you read it why?

  • Kathy. Iowa, Iowa
    July 9, 2013 5:47 p.m.

    Once you start boycotting because of feelings on LGBT issues it can't end well. There are more of heteros then gays, and gays can't reproduce.

  • LVIS Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:50 p.m.

    Hmmm. I wonder if the LGBT community will now boycott every movie/show Harrison Ford is in.

  • RockOn Spanish Fork, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:55 p.m.

    At one time the gay commune were persecuted for their lifestyle. They decried people acting out against them. The whailed if they were descriminated against for jobs (and they should have screamed). They correctly said, "live and let live."

    Now they've adopted the same antics used against them to go after anyone who doesn't view life as they see it. This makes as much sense as refusing to listen to Barbra Streisand sing because she's such a leftist loony.

    Sad that those once excluded seek to exclude others now.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    July 9, 2013 5:55 p.m.

    I'll just politely wait for natural selection to reduce homosexuality to a point of obscurity again.
    After all, it happens to be contrary to both God's law as well as the theory of evolution. Under both belief systems it is contrary to the "plan".

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    July 9, 2013 6:00 p.m.

    SSmith, jcobabe and others, if an author wrote opinion pieces saying that practicing the LDS faith should be illegal, would you go to a movie or buy books he authored? What if he was on the board of an organization that actively funded laws to deny you of your rights to practice your faith? It seems like extreme examples, but Ken Starr in defending Prop 8 argued a majority of citizens should be allowed to vote on any group's rights, including their First Amendment rights if they so chose. Those lawyers were paid by the money from the organization where OSC sits on the board. Would you tolerate that if you were on the receiving end?

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:06 p.m.

    I understand their reasons to boycott the film, but come on folks, he has already been paid for the film. This boycott is not going to affect Orson Scott Card's income in any way. What it will do is affect everyone else involved with this project. Do not hold everyone else involved in the movie responsible for what he said.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:16 p.m.

    This is in the 'family' section?

  • ShaunMcC La Verkin, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:24 p.m.

    Within my family and my circle of friends we often disagree. The topic of homosexual behavior being sinful and disapproved of by God is one that we have taken up often. I am glad that every one of us in those circles can freely share what we believe with each other without condemning those who have differing opinions. I respect every one of the opinions, even when I disagree. The others do likewise and we have all come to understand and have empathy for those whose opinions disagree with ours. That is what civil dialogue is and should be. Those, like Kalindra above (who doesn't know that Seventh Son is based on Joseph Smith, not BOM) criticize without knowledge.

    That said, as a serious fan of OSCs work, I find it sad that people paint him with a brush so offensive as "bigot" without knowing anything about him or his work. Believing scripture to be true does not make one a bigot, it makes one a believer and defender of that which they believe in. How they treat people is what determines the kind of person they are. OSC called me after my son died. Bad guy? Not!

  • Shimlau SAINT GEORGE, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:30 p.m.

    Dan O, almost every time I watch a movie, I'm financially supporting at least one person who doesn't agree with me in at least one thing. Is this bad? Kalindra; if you haven't read Ender's Game, and you have not even a passing interest, why would you go see it, all of the political and social rhetoric aside?

  • COUGARNATE Lyman, WY
    July 9, 2013 6:31 p.m.

    Good book, and I cannot wait to see the movie. I will see it twice now just because of this ridiculous boycott.

  • Larry Chandler CEDAR CITY, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:33 p.m.

    Boycotts are always silly and actually counterproductive, whether it's people boycotting this film or refusing to eat at Chick Fil-A because of supposedly anti-gay pronouncements, or people boycotting Disney World because of supposedly pro-gay policies. It just calls attention to the product which will only increase patronage. Just like when the Catholic Legion of Decency would announce a ban on a particular book, it only increased sales since everyone was curious about something they may have never heard of before.

    On the other hand, sometimes boycotts are started by people who simply want to increase sales and pretend to be against it.

  • Shimlau SAINT GEORGE, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:35 p.m.

    I have read the book and I can hardly wait for the movie!

  • paintandestroy Richmond/Cache, UT
    July 9, 2013 6:42 p.m.

    Hmmm, and what was Bill Clintons, Obamas, and most others thoughts toward homosexuality back then- Now we've lost the freedom to even suggest accountability or morality have a place in the debate.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 9, 2013 6:47 p.m.

    @Civil --

    "What is the rational for denying any of those now? "

    I'm so glad you asked. :-)

    There is a universally recognized legal principle often referred to as the "harm principle". Roughly, this means that actions which cause harm to others, or which significantly increase the risk of harm to others, are wrong. Harm is a valid legal reason for limiting freedoms.

    Our Federal and State legal systems have acknowledged -- many times over -- that they have a strong interest in keeping acts like pedophilia, incest, and polygamy illegal, because of this "harm principle".

    The Federal and State courts have recognized in multiple court decisions that the state does NOT have an interest in banning homosexuality, because consensual homosexual relations do NOT cause harm. The courts recognize the distinctions between these acts, even if you don't.

    Here's one very brief example. "Lawrence" is the SCOTUS decision that overturned sodomy bans.

    -- Utah v. Holm (10th Cir. 2006), reaffirming polygamy bans: "the holding in Lawrence is actually quite narrow.....In fact, the Court went out of its way to EXCLUDE FROM PROTECTION conduct that causes 'injury to a person or abuse of an institution the law protects.'"

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    July 9, 2013 6:47 p.m.

    John Galt, as a public service. Sometimes, the News actually lets a comment through that doesn't fit the editorial staff's views. Sadly, they limit you to 3 posts per story whether or not they actually get posted, so this is my last.

    Civil, that's certainly the narrative NOM wants you to believe, but an unconstitutional law is unconstitutional no matter how many people vote for it. The Proponents had a chance to defend Prop 8. They put forth one witness. He not only was a horrible witness for them, he has since recanted and has now come out for marriage equality. Schwarzenegger, who had twice vetoed marriage equality, chose not to appeal. That's a power given a governor when the State is a defendant. There is nothing new in this. He believed that the 9th would uphold the lower court's ruling (as they did.) Therefore, it was proper not to seek appeal if he believed the state would continue to lose.

  • Lone Eagle Aurora, CO
    July 9, 2013 6:50 p.m.

    And this is news because? Oh, that's right, it about how dissed some in the LGBT crowd are over someone's opinion against their chosen lifestyle (and it is chosen -- the lifestyle, i.e., behavior part).

  • OnlyInUtah Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 9, 2013 7:22 p.m.

    They can boycott all they want. I'll go see it a hundred times for myself and another hundred to offset their boycotting.

    I'm proud to be heterosexual and I've been waiting a long time for Enders Game to hit the big screen!!!

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    July 9, 2013 7:24 p.m.

    DanO

    Post away, there's no limit. Go check a BYU sports story for proof of this. There are several Ute posters that blabber away... more than 3 times.

  • mkh Aberdeen, SD
    July 9, 2013 7:26 p.m.

    I'm not a big fan or supporter of Hollywood and movies since they seem to generally purvey and promote immorality, but I will make it a point to attend this movie.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    July 9, 2013 7:26 p.m.

    I predict this movie will be a blockbuster of epic proportions much like the #1 at Chick Fil A.

    Count me in. I'll even buy tickets to give away... popcorn and a drink if you ask me nicely.

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    July 9, 2013 7:39 p.m.

    Card is an artist; those who only talk of one subject 24/7 are not; and live boring dull lives.

  • Oatmeal Woods Cross, UT
    July 9, 2013 7:45 p.m.

    Argue with Mr. Card all you want, but what is the difference between boycotting a movie and denying a LGBT person housing or a job? You are attacking people's well-being or "pursuit of happiness" (property) because you disagree with them. It is simply persecution for voicing an opinion... very un-American in my book.

    If you want to defeat Mr. Card's ideas, the only REAL way to do that is through dialogue and intelligent debate.

  • Baccus0902 Leesburg, VA
    July 9, 2013 7:58 p.m.

    @ John Galt,

    We have to read the Deseret News, particularly the comments section. This paper give us the pulse on how the very extreme right feels about certain issues.

    This particular article and the response of its readers is very telling.

    I read other papers and I have not seen any reaction yet about this movie. May be the counter-boycott is important only in Utah.

    I want to congratulate all of you who will spend extra money in promoting this movie. It will be good for the economy of the state of Utah. May not be a good reason, but money is money!

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    July 9, 2013 8:00 p.m.

    I bet many people here were just fine with calling for a boycott of Tom Hanks on Jan 17, 2009.

  • Zed Orem, UT
    July 9, 2013 8:12 p.m.

    The ultimate irony of this group, again and again, is clearly stated in a quote from the article that says there is no reason to be "tolerant of the intolerant".

    Intolorant according to whom? Us, of course! So, if to be tolerant, it's not necessary to be tolerant of the intolerant, as defined by "us", who then do we need to be tolerant of? Those who agree with us, of course! The problem is...that's not tolerance.

    The true virtue of tolerance is turned on its head again and again by those who merely end up using it as code speak to mean, "You MUST accept my views, but I have no duty to reciprocate."

    It really is an ironic contradicion that is totally lost on most liberal groups. Why do I single out liberal groups? Because it is THEY who use that word as a defining characteristic of everything they do. It is utterly hypocritcal.

    Tolerance, by definition, is tolerating those with whom you disagree, perhaps completely disagree. And its perfectly fine if you don't want to tolerate another viewpoint. But please, STOP throwing around the term as if you actually believe it.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 9, 2013 8:29 p.m.

    Why are so many posters actively claiming that the boycott of a movie detracts from freedom of speech? It in fact is the celebration of it. That's the whole point of the freedom as well as the right the assemble. The beauty of free speech is that people can choose to go or not go. There is no need for censorship. This group is not calling for a ban of the movie, they are not calling for a ban of the book, they are not calling for the denial of Mr. Card to publish. They are simply encouraging those of a like mind to not go see the movie.

    Interestingly, it is a far more civil and powerful action than simply banning a movie or a book or a TV show; something Utah theaters, television stations and bookstores frequently do when the owners disagree with the content. If you are a conservative person, you should be encouraged that some people still stand up and speak their opinion. I don't know how someone could claim to be a conservative person in favor of Constitutional principles, but abhor the thought of those principles being exercised.

  • cassadove Tampa, FL
    July 9, 2013 8:31 p.m.

    As someone else said, boycotting the movie isn't going to effect Card's income, but it may very well effect the income of the staff of the movie. Boycotting the movie also won't change Card's socio-political stances, so why bother? Seems like a waste of time and effort.

  • ThornBirds St.George, Utah
    July 9, 2013 8:36 p.m.

    Wow, This author/movie maker surely must be grateful for Utah!
    How's this all going elsewhere?

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 8:54 p.m.

    @samhill
    "given the actions of the boycott activists and to strike a blow for freedom of thought and expression"

    A boycott IS freedom of thought and expression, just like those who commented on the Lucky Charms story about how they'd stop buying it.

    @dhsalum
    "The guy made a comment 23 years ago, yet his entire lifestyle is 'bigoted'. "

    He's made more recent comments that the boycott finds objectionable, this article just didn't note them (like one of them about rebelling against a gov't that supports same-sex marriage came from something he wrote a few years ago for this paper).

  • Kings Court Alpine, UT
    July 9, 2013 9:40 p.m.

    I find it interesting that people think that boycotting a movie is intolerant. It is simply an expression of speech. People boycotting for a cause are no different than people giving support to a cause. If gays don't want to support the movie because of Card's stance, then fine. If people want to ingest a high calorie meal from a chicken place on their way to Ender's Game to support Card's stance, then fine. Who cares? Personally, I think that chicken restaurant is gross and will skip out on that, but I loved reading Ender's Game and I'm going to see the movie. I do things because that is what I enjoy doing, not groveling and doing things to demonstrate fealty to one special interest or another.

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    July 9, 2013 10:24 p.m.

    I think it's ironic that those asking for a boycott are giving the movie more attention and interest than it otherwise would have. Many who had no plans to see the movie will now go see it, as evidenced by many of the posters in these comments. What's the old marketing adage..."no publicity is "bad" publicity". Maybe some of these boycotters should spend more time in marketing and economics classes than gay rights parades and picketing. What good is giving free advertising to the very entity you wish to harm or diminish?

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    July 9, 2013 10:26 p.m.

    I'm sick of the intolerance by the Right and the Left. The Left is guilty on this particular one. The problem with liberals sometimes is that they are often not liberal (or open minded) themselves. I hope this boycott backfires.

  • kitsutsuki South Jordan, Utah
    July 9, 2013 10:33 p.m.

    This is why I am tired of "this" community. It is either their way or the highway. You want to be gay, fine, be gay. But the continual whining and "coming out" parties are getting really, really old.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    July 9, 2013 10:48 p.m.

    I do celebrate the boycott as free speech. It fully exposes the pure hypocrisy of the pro-homosexual activists, and their followers. They demand tolerance, acceptance, and endorsement, but refuse to give even tolerance, let alone acceptance and endorsement.

    Let them hang themselves in their own rope (figuratively speaking).

    Did you know that Chick-fil-a has amazing fresh-squeezed lemonade?

  • LeDoc SLC, UT
    July 9, 2013 11:19 p.m.

    I find the majority of comments about this to be just plain sad. So much hate. It reminds me of the ridiculous (in my opinion) news I read yesterday that the outgoing Iranian president, Ahmadinejad declared that the proudest moment in his presidency was bringing his absurd notion that the Holocaust was a hoax to the international stage. I do not happen to be attracted to those of my own gender but I have PLENTY of other problems and from what I've seen of life so does everybody else. I guess I must be missing something because when I read the "love thy neighbor" stuff I fail to see the caveat that says love only those who are as small minded as you are.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    July 9, 2013 11:48 p.m.

    As a homosexual; this is exactly why I refuse to identify myself as gay.

    All homosexuals DO NOT think alike and gay activists do not represent me any more than the Klan represents all white people. I get so weary of those who claim to speak for me when they merely embarrass me with the fact that they demand tolerance but seldom actually do tolerance.

  • Heidi T. Farmington, UT
    July 9, 2013 11:57 p.m.

    What a stupid war! Yes, some of us do not support the LGBTQ communities (plural due to any sexual diversion known to man)and some of us disagree with their practicing life styles. IN ADDITION, we have a right to our opinions, (true) and we avoid word wars and boycotts. Oh, please leave things be, drop your crusade, and put your energies in doing good in the world. You have the law on your side now; just get on with your lives. Yeh, I want to see Card's movie, and yeh he has a right to his opinions. Really! Get a life and learn to accept not being able to change others' choices and opinions. LGBTQs, you don't have this world to yourselves. Can't believe all this going on over a movie. If you want to view pro LGBTQ, watch TV sitcoms. Yes, high energy here.

  • Heidi T. Farmington, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:04 a.m.

    Oh, one more question... What is WRONG with OSC sitting on the Board of the National Organization for Marriage? Really? It isn't okay that he actually supports his views with service and commitment and not an immature raging boycott?

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:39 a.m.

    I am for marriage equality. But the LGBT "thought police" isn't helping.

  • Grammy3 SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:50 a.m.

    I am sorry but I am getting so sick and tired of hearing all about the rights that the guys and what they stand for and then have no tolerance is how others feel. All of us who believe that marriage if ordained by God have the very same rights as they have. I am getting so sick of hearing all about the rights of others but then when we want to express our opinions we get kicked in the but for saying so. I wanted to see this movie before but now I will go to this movie several times and along the way I will go and shop at Hobby Lobby and eat lunch or dinner at Chick fil a

  • Crossfire5 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 5:55 a.m.

    Good for Orson Scott Card! If you speak out today against same sex marriage or gay rights issues, you are automatically labeled as a bigot. The "gay" community is outraged anymore to hear any suggestion that their lifestyle choices are not normal, or that marriage is only between a man and a woman. At a time when so many have surrendered to popular opinion, Card's willingness to speak out in movie form is refreshing! I will see "Enders Game", and encourage others to do so as well.

  • maclouie Falconer, NY
    July 10, 2013 5:55 a.m.

    Movie will be a big hit in New York if I can help it.

  • Born that Way Layton, UT
    July 10, 2013 6:02 a.m.

    I love many who will boycott this movie, but OSC's comments are spot on. Personally I find the idea of a boycott ridiculously wrong-headed and hypocritical. During the McCarthy era, when the country was in a frenzy about the dangers of communism, there was a cruel tendency to blacklist people, denigate them as deviants, and even call them homosexuals... such labels would destroy their careers and heap shame upon them.

    If there was ever a more ugly time for when conservatives were whipped into an unholy frenzy all for the sake of protecting society, it was then... and some politicos in the LGBT now wish to resurrect those times by engaging in like manner.

    No thanks. I'll go on being happy with who I am, seeing the movies that interest me, and avoiding the ridiculous intolerance that occurs by those who wish to maintain their power even after the courts have ruled whole-heartedly in their favor.

  • Dave Duncan Orem, UT
    July 10, 2013 6:18 a.m.

    In this era of "Enlightenment and Tolerance", we cannot tolerate any criticisms of the LGBT community--even if it happened 30 YEARS AGO.

  • franc Kirkland, WA
    July 10, 2013 6:58 a.m.

    I've personally come to the point at which I'm tired of the LGBT deciding who is and is not worthy of being listened to ... I'll decide for myself.
    I am going to be sure to give everyone I know tickets to this movie as a gift ... a gift that will represent the freedom of thought, freedom of expression and the freedom to know we still have the right to say what we do or do not want to accept, regardless of who might bully us through that process.

    (and PS ... the LGBT are the ones who started the whole "that is bullying" movement ... no one can even tease another without being accused of "bullying" ... but this group is perfectly comfortable bullying anyone who THEY don't like ... ugh!)

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    July 10, 2013 7:04 a.m.

    I think a boycott of any product, including a movie, is fine. Those on both sides of various issues have boycotted or supported products based on approval or disapproval of the creator of the product.

  • oldschooler USA, TX
    July 10, 2013 7:11 a.m.

    Let's watch it over and over, and over, and over.........

  • Mountain Bird West Jordan, UT
    July 10, 2013 7:15 a.m.

    No question about it. We're going to the movie.

  • SolarMan Albuquerque, NM
    July 10, 2013 7:23 a.m.

    @Kalindra, You must have read _The Memory of Earth_. The _Seventh Son_ is more of the Joseph Smith story.

    I have read many of OSC's writings on marriage and the importance of a strong family unit. He has NEVER advocated harming the gay community. He has only worked to strengthen marriage between a man and a woman. He has made it clear that he disapproves of acting on homosexual inclinations, but he has never called for harm to homosexuals.

    I clearly agree that marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman with the primary purpose of providing a stable environment for raising children. A strong family is what builds a strong future generation. Many heterosexual marriages are missing the mark, and that is a shame. Homosexual marriage never had the intent of building strong future generations. We won't be strong as a country or world if we continue to de-emphasize strong families of one man, one woman, and their children.

  • TimBehrend Auckland NZ, 00
    July 10, 2013 7:29 a.m.

    Ender's Game is a book for adolescents; i imagine the movie will be as well. Maybe that's why so many readers are sending comments that say, "Nah, nah, i'm gonna do the opposite a what they want, and crow about it, too. Cockadoodle doo".

  • trekker Salt Lake, UT
    July 10, 2013 7:39 a.m.

    The homosexuals complain about how they want tolerance, but it seems to me they have no tolerance towards anyone whose views differ from theirs or anyone who doesn't agree with their lifestyle. Maybe they should look up a little think called freedom of speech. That author has a right to his opinion.

  • SportsFann Bountiful, UT
    July 10, 2013 7:54 a.m.

    I am NOT an Orson Scott Card fan for a variety of reasons, but he is a great writer and with the director and cast of Ender's Game, this movie will rock. What is so funny is that the gay community is giving the film tons of free press and media exposure. LOLOLOLOL...And as others have so well pointed out, intolerance from those who proclaim tolerance is just silly. Get over yourselves.

  • Christian 24-7 Murray, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:01 a.m.

    I totally support the rights of those who wish to boycott. In fact I applaud it.

    It shows homosexual activists for who they really are, HYPOCRITES. They are people demanding tolerance, acceptance, and endorsement of their choices, feelings, and behaviors, but are totally unwilling to grant even a slight amount of tolerance for others, let alone acceptance or endorsement.

    Time for a fresh Lemonade from Chick-fil-a.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 8:06 a.m.

    In regards to Card -- Y'all need to remember that Card didn't just make a few remarks 20 years ago, and he didn't just serve on the board of NOM.

    This man, in 2008, actually advocated ARMED INSURRECTION AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

    He said -- and this is a direct quote:

    "Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary. . . .How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.:''

    He didn't say "vote the bums out of office". He didn't say "we'll get em at the next election". He specifically said "I WILL ACT TO DESTROY THAT GOVERNMENT" and "BY WHATEVER MEANS".

    That is waaaaaaaay over any reasonable line, folks.

  • The Scientist Provo, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    When I see Orson at a family reunion, I will be sure to express my disagreement with his objectionable statements.

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:19 a.m.

    "Maybe they should look up a little think called freedom of speech. That author has a right to his opinion."

    The greatest part of our freedom of speech is that who disagree have just as much right to voice their disapproval. While I believe this proposed boycott is misguided, it is their right to announce their plans because of their disapproval for what Mr. Card has said. We are free to say whatever we want, but let's remember to be mature enough to accept the consequences and backlash that may come as a result.

    "What is so funny is that the gay community is giving the film tons of free press and media exposure."

    Please don't believe that everyone in the "gay community" is planning on boycotting this film. To tell you the truth, a large percentage haven't even given much thought to the topic because they haven't heard about the boycott. I know many gay friends who still eat at Chik-fil-a, and I know many gay friends who will likely go see this movie when it hits the theaters.

  • Brown Honeyvale, CA
    July 10, 2013 8:20 a.m.

    @Contrarius

    Your interpretation of Mr Card's comments trouble me... Also, when the entire section of an author's writings are not included I am suspicious… I don't believe the tone of his writings are 'armed rebellion' Stop creating paranoia and inaccurate judgment of an individual with your cherry-picked quotes and inaccurate interpretations.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    @Brown --

    "Your interpretation of Mr Card's comments trouble me... "

    How would YOU interpret those words??

    "Also, when the entire section of an author's writings are not included I am suspicious… "

    Hey -- we only get 200 words per post. Blame DN for that, not me.

    "Stop creating paranoia and inaccurate judgment"

    Translation: stop posting the facts.

    ;-)

    OSC was my favorite author for years. I think he has written some great things. Nonetheless, he has gone over the line with his anti-gay polemics -- and the quote I posted was only one example of that fact.

    Facts are facts, Brown.

    I **am** very encouraged by his latest comments, though. I just found out that he has been quoted in an article in Entertainment Weekly just this week. I've gotta go buy that, and see if he said anything interesting in addition to what this DN article has quoted.

    I have nothing against people learning from and admitting their past mistakes, so if he makes any reconciliatory statements I may re-evaluate my current opinion of him.

  • 8ofusnot7 Elk Ridge, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:43 a.m.

    I'm tired of the intolerance and nastiness of all those who ask for our tolerance. I don't care what anyone does in their personal life but I don't want that lifestyle shoved down my throat or my families throat. I will see this movie and I in fact will buy tickets for all of my friends, children and grandchildren. To make things more festive we will go to Chick-Fila for dinner before. Thank you for bringing the info on this boycott to my attention. I hadn't even heard of the movie but I can hardly wait to see it now.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:49 a.m.

    Those of you condemning us for boycotting anti-gay establishments are perfectly happy supporting the boycotts of Disney and many others for their pro-gay support. How do you spell hypocrite?

  • Bob A. Bohey Marlborough, MA
    July 10, 2013 8:50 a.m.

    Wow, the amount of hate spewing forth in these comments is amazing. It makes me wonder if people are really paying attention on Sunday or are just showing up as posers.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    July 10, 2013 8:51 a.m.

    @Contrarius: Do you really think we readers are ignorant enough to not notice your inflammatory rant is twisting quotes and inferring that which was not said?

    Oh, BTW, thanks DN for allowing Contrarius to use ALL CAPS, contrary to your policy.

    Armed insurrection? Nope, he did not say it. Destroy the Government by any means? Nope, he didn't say that.
    He takes a stand right from our Declaration of Independence: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

    However, our Government is destroyed every day. It is destroying itself, especially when the DA won't defend or enforce laws that are duly passed - see immigration, DOMA, Prop8, etc. It is the right and responsibility of the citizens to "destroy" that which is unjust, or is implemented in an oppressive way: See IRS Tax Code, US Justice System.

    Kudos to Mr. Card for putting his volunteerism and time where his mouth is.

  • 1978 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:53 a.m.

    The producers of this movie are probably ecstatic about this boycott. Just ask the Chick Fil A executives.

    From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, "the fast-food giant took in $4.6 billion in sales in 2012 -- up 14 percent from the previous year – and opened 96 new stores, four more than in 2011."

    I didn't eat at Chick Fil A until the boycott and wasn't planning on seeing this movie until this boycott either.

  • Susan Roylance
    July 10, 2013 8:59 a.m.

    The opposition to this movie has increased the publicity, and a larger crowd will see it. In the end, the result will be greater financial returns for the producers of the movie.

  • Badger55 Nibley, Ut
    July 10, 2013 9:03 a.m.

    Orson Card needs to cut a check to these groups. They probably just made this movie a smash at the box office.

  • IMAPatriot2 PLEASANT GROVE, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    To DanO: From now on I refuse to go to Disneyland because they support the homosexual life style by having a "gay" only day at the park. I will not spend my money in a place that supports a lifestyle and belief that are unnatural at best and definitely against the best interests of society. I am doing this because, based on your post, you feel that it is OK to not give money to an organization which will turn around and use it against common sense.

    THIS IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE. IT IS A MORAL AND SOCIAL ISSUE.

  • Max Charlotte, NC
    July 10, 2013 9:06 a.m.

    These people are obviously not content with equal rights, they want revenge!

  • BCA Murrieta, CA
    July 10, 2013 9:08 a.m.

    I find the objections to the boycott hilarious. Mormons are told to not go to any R rated movie regardless of content. So what's the big deal here?

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:12 a.m.

    Nothing like a boycott to lead people to a "let's stick it to those pesky gays" movement.

  • Contrariusier mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    @J-TX --

    "Armed insurrection? Nope, he did not say it. Destroy the Government by any means? Nope, he didn't say that. "

    I quoted his exact words. In fact, his comments were originally published right here in the DN in 2008, as part of a longer op-ed piece -- so you can check those words for yourself if you don't believe me.

    He said:

    "no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary."

    "any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. "

    "I will act to destroy that government and bring it down"

    We have a word for people who declare the US government to be their "mortal enemey" and who feel they need to "act to destroy that government".

    And it isn't a nice word, either.

    @IMAPatriot2 --

    "a lifestyle and belief that are unnatural at best"

    Homosexual behaviors can be found in many non-human species out in nature. Therefore, they are by definition "natural".

    "and definitely against the best interests of society."

    How? How does homosexuality damage society? Please be specific.

  • Big Bubba Herriman, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    I would not call it a boycott, just people choosing to watch what they want. I never boycotted Brokeback Mountain - I just chose not to watch it because I was not interested. If the gay community does not want to see Ender's game it's no different than choosing not to watch Teletubbies.

  • NT SomewhereIn, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    Just funny to read that a VERY small group of whiners who would most likely NOT attend the particular movie anyway announce their short-sighted intention of boycotting it. This will most likely result in many MORE people attending. lol

    Chalk me up for a family pass and a chik-a-filet feast.

  • carabaoU Moab, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    @Contrarius

    I say the same things you mentioned Card said. I know others with same thoughts and feelings. Is that wrong? No. I can talk about those things all I want, that is what is so great about this country. Unfortunately, people like you wish to squash those thoughts just like society has done in regards to saying how cool it would be to see a plane or the white house blow up. I know, I'll now be under scrutiny by NSA for saying my thoughts on a message board on the internet. That's ok, if they want to knock me off, let them try.

    How do you think the Revolutionary War started? It started with people getting tired of the government (British) and laws and taxes and whatnot. If they could not talk about kicking the Brits out of the land, when would that have happened? The present would be far different than it is today.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:22 a.m.

    @J-TX
    Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary. - Orson Scott Card

    "Destroy the Government by any means? Nope, he didn't say that. "

    He literally says whatever means is made possible or necessary.

  • NT SomewhereIn, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:21 a.m.

    @DanO

    "We refuse to give money to a man who will turn around and use it against our rights. Would you if it were you?"

    Ummmm...all I will say is "April 15th" - follow THAT money! Then retract your statement.

  • ExecutorIoh West Jordan, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:23 a.m.

    The only official document that I know that lists civil rights is the US Constitution with its accompanying Amendments. The word marriage isn't mentioned once in any of those documents. Marriage isn't a civil right, it is a civil responsibility. It is a contract. There is no harm in making that contract as strong as possible. No one is saying that you can't love your partner, or even qualify for legal rights and protections like visitation and next of kin. But don't screw with the traditional family. When the organization of the family unit fails, so follows society in general.

    Homosexuality isn't new, it has been present for millennia and nations that embrace it ultimately fail. Darwin's Natural Selection and Theory of Evolution prove that same gender attraction is not natural or normal. It is a psychological disease, not a physical normality or the gene would have been irradiated a long time ago.

    We can argue that same-gender marriages are good for kids, but I think its irrefutable that opposite-gender parents, where both parents are biological and contribute their unique gender skills and characteristics is what is BEST in a family.

  • JimE Kaysville, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:23 a.m.

    Funny how some people think that just because a court rules a certain way, that it is the correct ruling. I know the words "wickedness" and "corrupt" is foreign to certain types of people. But that is what is happening to this country. We're turning to hedonism, as evidenced by these court rulings. You know hedonism, that thing that destroyed Rome and lots of other nations. Our pattern of self-destruction is right before us in the history of this world. But we're too focused on our own carnal addictions to see it.
    And yes, I'll go see the movie now. Wasn't planning on it before now.

  • Momofcmadb West Jordan , UT
    July 10, 2013 9:23 a.m.

    It's our right and freedom to express our opinions so go ahead and boycott and I'll go see the movie twice . And on a side note I happen to know that Disneyland and Disney world In fact do not have a specific gay days set aside . It is the Gay community that has set aside certain days to celebrate Gay days and one if the places they choose to go among others just happens to be Disney. It is not promoted or sponsored by Disney .

  • Contrariusier mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 9:40 a.m.

    @carabaoU --

    "just like society has done in regards to saying how cool it would be to see a plane or the white house blow up."

    Yeah, because those words sound SO rational.

    Right.

    "How do you think the Revolutionary War started?"

    DingDingDing!

    Right. WARS get started when people talk about government being their "mortal enemy" and "destroying that government" "by any means necessary".

    That's called "incitement to violence".

    That's why we need to be concerned when public figures start talking that way.

    @NT --

    "who would most likely NOT attend the particular movie anyway"

    On the contrary.

    The group that started the boycott is GEEKS Out. Geeks are a target audience for sf.

    I'm a HUGE fantasy and science fiction fan myself. And as I mentioned previously, OSC was my favorite author for years.

    I don't know whether I'll go see this movie or not. I'm very tempted -- Ender's Game was my favorite book for a long time -- but I am also VERY uncomfortable with the thought of financially supporting Card. I have seen Card speak in person, I have read many of his anti-gay rants, I KNOW how homophobic the guy is.

  • JRJ Pocatello, ID
    July 10, 2013 9:41 a.m.

    I don't care if people choose a homosexual lifestyle. I do care if they continually shove it at me. When Ellen de Generis finally settled down to being a comedian and stopped trying to make a point, she became a household word to be respected, not a nut case. Compare that to the folks who insist on mincing about, dying their hair odd colors, talking nonstop about being homosexual, and introducing "wives or husbands" over and over and over. As has been said, whoever you are, go quietly into the world doing good instead of stirring up trouble.

    I haven't even read the book "Ender's Game", but I will certainly see the movie and not even wait until it hits the cheap theaters as I usually do. We are all entitled to our opinions.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:43 a.m.

    RE: Contrariuses “You [the LGBT community] must understand that not all people accept your lifestyle.”i.e...,

    Kenyan Cardinal John Njue, Archbishop of Nairobi and president of the Kenyan Episcopal Conference, joined other African leaders in open dismissal of President Obama’s urging to accept same-sex marriage.

    “Those people who have already ruined their society…let them not become our teachers to tell us where to go,” said Njue in response to Obama’s statements promoting same-sex marriage. “I think we need to act according to our own traditions and our faiths.”

  • Rustymommy Clovis, NM
    July 10, 2013 9:45 a.m.

    Will a boycott of this movie by gays and lesbians make a spit in the wind of difference in ticket sales? Probably not. On the other hand, if a movie promoted same sex marriage and all traditional marriage proponents boycotted it, that would put the movie right in the toilet. My movie dollars are limited and I carefully evaluate what I plan to see. I hadn't planned on going to see this movie, but might just do so to thumb my nose at political correctness. In fact, since I don't particularly approve of many aspects of Hollywood lifestyle, maybe I should boycott all movies that include gays,lesbians, bisexuals, shacked up couples or adulterers in their cast or script.

    Word of advice to the boycott folks: When you are asking to have your viewpoint heard and recognized by the American public, remember that everybody else is entitled to the same privilege, even those who disagree with you. So don't be offended if the movie you like is boycotted by those who don't share your priorities.

    .

  • GrammaG Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 9:55 a.m.

    This is ridiculous. First, Mr. Card is entitled to his opinions. Just as the protesters are free to make their choices, so is Mr. Card entitled to his choices. Those choices are in no way demeaning to others. Second, This movie nor the novel it is coming from have anything to do with gay rights, pro or con. Its just an entertaining science fiction story illustrating the resilience and ingenuity of the characters who are mostly children and teens.

  • Beck to Harline Provo, UT
    July 10, 2013 10:02 a.m.

    Everyone has a right to their opinion. If the LGBTQ community truly wants to be seen as tolerant, instead of whiney/adolescent, maybe they should look at history and examine successes...the successes like the Civil Rights movement in the 60's. Civil disobedience. The only difference between now and the 60's, is that there are more Black people than LGBTQ people. This will evidently fail, and ultimately prove counterproductive.

    Was the whole Chick-fil-A fiasco not evidence enough that this style of boycott is simply ineffective? Seems like common sense to me.

    These are changing times. The LGBTQ movement needs to stop oversimplifying issues. Straight people are not (all) bigots. Likewise, LGBTQ people are not all intolerant/like-minded.

  • EnosEugenius Shenandoah, IA
    July 10, 2013 10:08 a.m.

    I do not agree with the homosexual lifestyle, nor do I support gay marriage. It is based on a religious belief, one that all the boycotts and namecalling in the world will not change. That said, I listen to Elton John because he is a talented musician, not because he is gay. I think Neil Patrick Harris is a phenomenal actor, regardless of his sexual orientation. And my problem with Disney is not their stance on homosexuality, it is their continuing erosion of important family values. I also understand that not all gay people agree with the GLBTQAUJKLMEIEIO blowhards, so when I refer to "them," it is limited in scope to the offending individuals.

    At first, "they" advocated against the belief that homosexuality was a "mental illness." Then, "they" advocated for tolerance. Next, "they" advocated for "equal" rights. And now, "they" advocate for acceptance. They still call it tolerance. However, true tolerance isn't enough; they demand to be accepted by all. They rail against people and churches based on their beliefs, because they are different than the ones they will allow people to have. This is not tolerance. Tolerance is allowing someone to have a different viewpoint than you.

  • EnosEugenius Shenandoah, IA
    July 10, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    @BCA: Mormons are counseled to avoid movies that are rated "R" by the MPAA _BECAUSE_ of the content, not "regardless" of it. In case you aren't familiar with the MPAA ratings system, it is based on the content of the movie (objectionable language, sexual content, adult themes, nudity, violence). Repeatedly subjecting the human mind to objectionable content desensitizes it. A desensitized mind becomes skewed as to "right" and "wrong" -- look into the history of your average serial killer, rapist, etc., and you will see a history of progressive desensitization, beginning with cruelty to animals, viewing pornography, etc. We believe that anything that encourages or promotes such desensitizing is morally wrong.

  • Utah Native Farmington, UT
    July 10, 2013 10:21 a.m.

    I did a unit on this with my sophomores and really enjoyed this book, even though the genre wasn't one that I thought I'd find appealing. I'm interested to see how it's been adapted cinematically and will see it for that reason, if for none other.

  • NT SomewhereIn, UT
    July 10, 2013 10:22 a.m.

    Why some have to publicize their intolerance by grabbing at headlines that they are not going to patronize a particular establishment (food service, entertainment, etc) is beyond me.

    When my family and I make a choice of where we will spend our time/money/resource, we do not feel compelled to have a parade or make a public spectacle of it. And, although I don't "get it" as to why others feel a need for that level of self-affirmation, I won't attempt to quell their right to do so.

  • Contrariusier mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    @JimE --

    "hedonism, that thing that destroyed Rome and lots of other nations."

    Hedonism did NOT destroy Rome, sorry. Both Roman and Greek civilizations encouraged homosexual relations -- and both civilizations survived for roughly 1000 years each.

    I'd love to hear about any other nations that you believe were desroyed by hedonism. Please be specific.

    @ExecutorIoh --

    "Marriage isn't a civil right"

    The Supreme Court says otherwise.

    From Loving v Virginia:

    "Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888)."

    "Darwin's Natural Selection and Theory of Evolution prove that same gender attraction is not natural or normal."

    Actually, homosexual behaviors can be found in many non-human species out in nature. Therefore, it is by definition "natural".

    Darwin himself recognized the fundamentals of group selection, kin selection, and behavioral ecology in general. Those concepts can be applied to homosexual behaviors in nature. Read up on them.

    @sharrona --

    Ummmm....so what? Many other Christian leaders have spoken out in SUPPORT of gay marriage. And many Christian denominations are already happy to perform gay weddings.

  • I-am-I South Jordan, UT
    July 10, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    I thought Ender's Game was a cool book till the end. The whole I feel bad for protecting my race, way of life, and world (even though it was all just a big misunderstanding that Ender had nothing to do with) seemed really mellow dramatic. Ender took responsibility when he should have just taken it for what it is. His efforts to reestablish the race he helped nearly annihilate was honorable though but his response was kind of silly.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    July 10, 2013 10:28 a.m.

    Yeah, I'm all confused now...am I supposed to be tolerant of people and their ideas and values that are different than mine or not?

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    July 10, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    I have to disagree with this one. If the movie itself was a slam on the gay community I could understand it, but this makes no sense. Let's engage his political views in the political arena, not the local movie theater.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    July 10, 2013 10:46 a.m.

    With regards to his members in the National Organization of Marriage. As some say they have spent millions to take away people's civil rights. No, they don't. They are only promoting traditional marriage and they are protecting people's right to conscience and religion. National Organization of Marriage and Orson Scott Card are the "New Liberal". Get used to it.

  • PTM ,
    July 10, 2013 10:50 a.m.

    'Yeah, I'm all confused now...am I supposed to be tolerant of people and their ideas and values that are different than mine or not?'

    Yes, you are and that is not what this boycott is about. It's about equal access to a basic right, marriage. No one on the LGBT side is advocating the end of marriage between a man and woman. And they are not advocating the end of a religion's right to structure their religion or ceremonies as they see fit. So Catholics, of which I am a 'retired' member, can deny the right of women to the priesthood or not marry homosexual couples. And the LDS can deny non-LDS family members the opportunity to see their children married; again I am in that club. It isn't the responsibility of homosexuals to subsidize the religious beliefs of a particular group. They just want an equal opportunity to get married. No skin of you nose, just be fair.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    July 10, 2013 10:54 a.m.

    @Contrarius:

    "I have read many of his anti-gay rants, I KNOW how homophobic the guy is."

    OK. Can you post them here for those of us who have not seen them and then we will know about his anti-gay rants and his homophobia. He wasn't saying words that would get him censored, was he?

  • bw00ds Tucson, AZ
    July 10, 2013 10:54 a.m.

    What!!! And boycott Harrison Ford?!! Are you kidding?!! :)

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 10, 2013 10:55 a.m.

    Re: "Card is an anti-gay activist and quotes from an article he wrote about homosexuality in 1990."

    By the same standard, President Obama is an anti-gay activist. His speeches from as recently as 18 months ago were almost exactly the same as Mr. Card's.

    So, when will LGBT activists begin boycotting the President?

  • RS Holladay, UT
    July 10, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    So what Geeks Out is saying is that it is not okay for Card to be himself and that he must be punished for having a different opinion than them. Interesting.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    July 10, 2013 11:18 a.m.

    Then it must be a good film. Will look forward to seeing it.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 10, 2013 11:39 a.m.

    Once again, the Gay Rights bashers are overstepping. This happened with Chik-FIl-A, and their stores were packed with customers. I waited 45 minutes to place an order, and had a great time!! The feeling at that store was one of comeraderie and of being united in a cause - the cause of free speech!!!

    Our country is founded on this principle, as well as the principle of Freedom of Religion. Both are fundamental, and both are at odds with the gay propoganda machine.

    Too bad "tolerance" is a one-way street for the gay activists.....

  • SlopJ30 St Louis, MO
    July 10, 2013 11:51 a.m.

    Does anyone else find it hilarious that choosing to see or not see a sci-fi popcorn flick is now tantamount to making a serious social statement? Ooh, how courageous! I'm going/not going to buy a ticket to Ender's Game! Maybe I'll even put a bumper sticker on my car!

    Boycotting movies or anything else because of the political positions of one of the parties involved in the making of the movie is ludicrous. If "Ender's Game" flops or becomes a massive hit, society's attitudes towards gay marriage will not be affected one way or the other. You may as well go to the library, find all Card's books, and shake your fist at them.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 10, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    @dhsalum;

    The comment quoted was 23 years ago; he is currently head of NOM and has very recently published articles against same-sex couples having the right to marry.

    I won't be going to the movie.

    I love that so many of you are spending your hard-earned money to support bigots. Good luck 'splainin yourselves to your maker when you meet him.

    @mbenfield;

    Guess what, we're tired of having our rights voted away. So what, we're a minority, that doesn't give you the right to deny us the governmental benefits you, yourself enjoy. Including marriage.

    @Civil;

    You fail to understand that the Constitution applies to ALL Americans and that YOU do not have the right to "vote" to deny those rights to Americans you disagree with.

    @ShaunMcC;

    Believing scripture to be true doesn't make a bigot, no. But working to deny someone the same benefits and rights he enjoys does.

    @OnlyInUtah;

    You're going to spend thousands on the movie? I seriously doubt it.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 10, 2013 11:52 a.m.

    @IMAPatriot2;

    It is a civil rights issue, a moral issue (fighting bigotry is a moral issue) and a social issue (equality is a social issue).

    @ExecutorIoh;

    "Perfect is the enemy of good".

    GrammaG says:

    "Those choices are in no way demeaning to others. "
    No? Why don't you try walking in our shoes for a day and then say that.

    Bigotry is out in force today.

  • RedWings CLEARFIELD, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:08 p.m.

    @ RanchHand

    Disagreement is not bigotry. You should try to practice a little of the "tolerance" you so loudly demand from others.

    In another 10 years when we are all talking about the destruction of religious freedom, and rights are being voted away from religious people, I hope you will stand just as tall in defense of others' rights and against religious bigotry.....

  • JP71 Ogden, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:19 p.m.

    I guess my family is seeing this movie now.

  • handshaker17 Centerville, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:21 p.m.

    Let's boycott "Finding Dory" because Ellen, a lesbian, is the voice of the main character.

  • SlopJ30 St Louis, MO
    July 10, 2013 12:28 p.m.

    RanchHand - Another problem with this limp form of *cough* "protest" *cough* is that you're directing it at one of hundreds of people involved with making the film, each of whom has his/her own political opinions, and many of whom have a stake in its success. I don't know if Harrison Ford has any kind of back-end deal on this one, but he's not exactly known for his conservative politics. The director, stars, producer, studio executives . . most are more than likely on your side of the gay marriage issue. The $10 you won't spend on the movie is also not going into their pockets.

    So, from a practical, logical POV, the plot to blow the box-office chances of "Ender's Game" is ineffectual at best, self-defeating at worst. Now, if you're only avoiding the movie as an internal statement to make yourself feel noble, then have at it. Just don't pretend like you're having any real, tangible, positive effect on your cause.

  • Lightbearer Brigham City, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:38 p.m.

    What is it to be "intolerant"? According to Merriam-Webster, one sense of the word is "unwilling to grant or share social, political, or professional rights." Gay people are not trying to take away the right of straight couples to marry, but opponents of gay marriage are unwilling to grant same-sex couples the right to marry. So which side is the intolerant one?

    If this is a religious issue, then why the push to enshrine religious beliefs in civil law? Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world?" and Christians strive "be be in the world, but not of the world," but what could be more "of the world" than getting involved in ballot initiatives and political squabbles?

    Can't people live their religion unless its doctrine is the law of the land?

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:38 p.m.

    @RedWings;

    Do you understand what tolerant is?

    I tolerate religious people, even though I disagree with them. Religious people, interfering in the lives of others because they disagree with those others is not tolerance. Is it intolerant to refuse to see a movie based on a book written by an author who uses his position to promote bigotry? No, it isn't. He's welcome to his views, but when he uses his position, and money and views to support discrimination, there is nothing to tolerate.

    I will fight for your religious freedom to believe anything you want, and to live YOUR life as YOU see fit. I will fight tooth-and-nail to prevent you from using your religious views to infringe upon the rights of others. That is tolerance.

    Tolerance: I'll tolerate you doing what I find abhorrent (religion) and you tolerate me doing what you find abhorrent (marrying my partner).

    Fighting bigotry and discrimination is not "intolerant" (nor is a boycott; religious people use them all the time).

  • Really??? Kearns, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:50 p.m.

    I used to think that the people of Utah were the kindest and most loving and accepting of people in the United States, but then something happened. The Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune allowed readers to post comments to the articles on their online editions. I soon discovered what my neighbors are really thinking, even though they smile at me in public. There is a lot of hostility toward anyone who doesn't fit in with the expected norm here.

    Both sides of the issue have a right to express their opinions, but let's think about what harm those opinions may cause. Your words or actions alone may not have an impact on an individual, but when combined by the constant daily and hourly reminders that some may get that remind them that they are not loved, your words then do contribute to some devastating results.

    I hope to never be one who contributes to one losing faith in humanity because of insensitive words or actions. All of our neighbors need love and support. Let's stop this cultural war and work towards being an example of the most tolerant and loving state in the nation.

  • JanSan Pocatello, ID
    July 10, 2013 12:51 p.m.

    I have personally made it a matter to boycott Tom Hanks sense his comment about LDS being unAmerican. Has it hurt him? NO! But I feel better within myself. I have no problem with the gays boycotting this show. I will do my part by supporting it by going and also by buying a ticket for someone else to go (I have some family birthdays coming up and now I know what to get them presents) and maybe even seeing it twice. I will also buy a ticket and just not go! To counteract against one "protestor" from not going. I just wonder what all the actors and workers on the show that are pro gay marriage are going to feel about this? We ALL know that MOST of Hollywood are pro gay. I have been a fan of the Ender Books for years! Have been looking for them to be made into movies for years............ no way am I going to miss them now!

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 12:52 p.m.

    @GiuseppeG
    "I supposed to be tolerant of people and their ideas and values that are different than mine or not?"

    Take the Westboro Baptist Church which is disliked by most people. They have a right to do the hateful things they do... but one can reasonably expect people who are otherwise tolerant to be rather intolerant (as far as expressing vocal disagreement with is concerned) when it comes to their message. In other words, tolerate everything except intolerance. Now... here's the difficult part. What constitutes intolerance? Something like the KKK okay, they're a hate group, that one's easy. At some point each individual draws their line somewhere and that's where the divide on this comes in. A lot of people see this boycott as intolerance, others see it as not tolerating intolerance on the other end.

    @Tekakaromatagi
    "They are only promoting traditional marriage and they are protecting people's right to conscience and religion."

    Most on the same-sex marriage side believes in letting churches marry who they will. Your side refuses to let same-sex marriages that some churches support be allowed by the gov't. I do not see this the way you do.

  • Brown Honeyvale, CA
    July 10, 2013 12:58 p.m.

    I will definitely support this movie and any other individual who is personally attacked because of their conservative beliefs. Unbelievable to me how intolerant and bigoted the LGBT community is. The rest of us need to stop worrying about appearing intolerant and Stand For What is Right! I am telling everyone I know to go see this movie, buy the DVD, watch it on demand...and hoping it will have record support. I will definitely support this movie and any other individual who is personally attacked because of their conservative beliefs. We are with you Mr Card!

    @Ranchhand The end goal of the LGBT community is not to have the civil right to be married; they can have all the civil rights of marriage with a Civil Union but they don't wish to obtain that "status". The next item on their agenda is to force their "marriage" to be recognized and performed in all religions, including those who teach that practicing homosexuality is against God's law. (Oh, and the right to adopt from religious adoption agencies.) Not an issue of civil rights… (the bogus no fed benefits line it just that bogus.)

  • mytwobits West Valley City, UT
    July 10, 2013 1:04 p.m.

    I enjoyed Ender's Game in print and look forward to seeing it on the big screen. I don't go to movies much, but this one will certainly get me into the theater. It will be a big plus to be able to thumb the nose at those who have been bullying traditional marriage supporters for way too long. Maybe I'll go twice. And take some friends. And buy a couple copies of the DVD. And maybe give away some copies of the book. And some ancillary items as Christmas presents for the grandkids. And talk it up among my friends and family. And, yes, stop by Chick-fil-A en route!

  • oldcougar Orem, UT
    July 10, 2013 1:07 p.m.

    Scott Card is a good guy, and accomplished writer, and one who backs his beliefs with action and involvement. He's a big boy and prepared to roll with the consequences of his words and actions. Because he believes marriage is between one man and one woman does not mean he hates or mistreats gays. He does not...nor do most conscientious, well-informed members of the LDS church. I have gay friends whom I respect and love...while not condoning nor accepting their behavior. I don't condemn them for gay activism...including boycotting a movie. I, and many members of my family, have read and enjoyed most of OSC's writings, including Ender's Game. We look forward to the movie. I'm sorry some friends will miss out on what promises to be an enjoyable experience. I'm guessing the net effect of the boycott will be positive for the movie and for OSC.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 1:08 p.m.

    Civil (5:37 pm 7/9): "Pandora's box is now open. We'll see what comes next... first cousins... None are any more unimaginable than homosexual marriage was 50 years ago."

    You're too late. First cousin marriages are legal in 25 states, including Utah (since 1996). It seems some things are imaginable.

    SocialModFiscalCon: "I'll just politely wait for natural selection to reduce homosexuality to a point of obscurity again."

    Don't hold your breath. Homosexuality seems to be a remarkably persistent trait, biologically speaking, especially since the phenotype does not typically directly pass genes to offspring. There may be other evolutionary mechanisms at play beyond superficial ideas of fitness.

  • LRB NY, NY
    July 10, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    It is really sad to read so many comments from people reveling in their dislike of gays (eat at Chik fila! Buy ten tickets!) I wonder if they if they think it appropriate for folk to publicly celebrate their disdain of the LDS community?

  • Balt Baltimore, MD
    July 10, 2013 1:25 p.m.

    I'll go see the movie, because I loved the book, and I can separate the art from the artist. That said, I consider Mr. Card a repulsive bigot. He would like to see criminal laws imposed against homosexuals, and one of my adult sons is gay. Card wants to send my son to prison for having been born that way? Really?

  • Pac_Man Pittsburgh, PA
    July 10, 2013 1:38 p.m.

    "It is really sad to read so many comments from people reveling in their dislike of gays (eat at Chik fila! Buy ten tickets!) I wonder if they if they think it appropriate for folk to publicly celebrate their disdain of the LDS community?"

    @LRB Kind of like "The Book of Mormon" musical?

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 10, 2013 1:43 p.m.

    @redwings

    So disagreement is not bigotry but when some supporters of the LGBT community speak out its intolerance? You do realize how many companies those that appose gay rights boycott right?

    I actually have no problem with those that appose or support gay rights boycotting my issue is when those that appose gay rights go beyond using their free speech and actually codify their bigotry into the laws as with prop 8 and amendment 3.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 10, 2013 1:55 p.m.

    @pac man

    Yes, just like that, we had dozens of articles and thousands of comments blasting those actions by the same people upset that some in the LGBT community refuse to see this movie. People should have the right to object and speak out against Mr Card and many of these posters reveling in their disdain for the LGBT community just like many should have and did with the book of Mormon musical

  • JapanCougar Apo, AP
    July 10, 2013 1:59 p.m.

    I just finished visiting the Topography of Terror Museum in Berlin. Very interesting museum about how the SS and Gestapo began and how they were used to suppress any dissenting voice to the Nazi party ideology.

    One of the early actions against the Jews was enforced boycotts against any business owned and operated by Jews. Additionally, those in the Democratic and Communist parties were publicly humiliated and oppressed, and finally jailed and killed.

    Freedom of speech is in danger when we see 'political correctness' enforced via boycotts.

    I don't like or agree with what Card said, but I am bothered by the modern-day thought police--including those in the LGBT community.

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    July 10, 2013 2:00 p.m.

    Thankfully, there is nothing illegal about boycotting. It just doesn't sound like a very fun thing to do- always focusing on the negative of something. A silly waste of time. That's not really good for mental health. And actually missing out on a great movie to boot. Thankfully we can still legally speak our minds. You just have to have thick skin if people don't like what you said and also realize daddy NSA is watching. So mind your Ps and Qs.

    To Contrarius, I love the comment that homosexuality is found in nature so it's "natural". Did you know my dogs' favorite treat is goose poop?

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 10, 2013 2:29 p.m.

    Actually, the quotes are from 2008. By why let facts get in the way of a claim of persecution?

  • Contrariusier mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    @O'really --

    "Did you know my dogs' favorite treat is goose poop?"

    And many dogs love horse poop -- also dead stinky rotten stuff.

    So what?

    "Natural" doesn't mean either good or bad. It just *is*. It's a fact of -- you guessed it -- nature.

    btw -- it's also false to claim that there is no evolutionary value in homosexual behavior. We may not always know what the value IS, but it is obviously valuable in many cases. For instance, roughly 1/4 of ALL black swan pairs are male-male pairs. And roughly 90% of ALL sexual interactions in giraffes are male-male. These behaviors obviously have value in those species -- otherwise, they wouldn't be so prominent.

    @JapanCougar --

    "One of the early actions against the Jews was enforced boycotts"

    You're talking apples and oranges here.

    "ENFORCED boycotts" are a completely different kettle of fish than "VOLUNTARY boycotts".

    Many anti-gay folks, including some of those commenting here on the DN comments boards, have declared that they will no longer purchase Lucky Charms -- or even Kellogg's products in general -- because of their support for gay rights. How is that any different than what pro-gay folks are advocating here?

  • 1978 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    @spring street

    Really? When was the public LDS boycott of "Book of Mormon the Musical" announced. I must have missed it.

  • very concerned Sandy, UT
    July 10, 2013 2:40 p.m.

    As a conservative and one who opposes homosexual behavior, I support the GLBT community's right to boycott this movie, with which they disagree. They are well within their rights to do so.

  • Pac_Man Pittsburgh, PA
    July 10, 2013 2:44 p.m.

    Really? When was the public LDS boycott of "Book of Mormon the Musical" announced. I must have missed it.

    ==============

    @1978 Exactly. There wasn't one.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    July 10, 2013 2:48 p.m.

    The author doesn't care about the boycott. He's been paid. This will only affect the owners of movie theaters and studios...I would imagine many of those employed by them are in the LGBT community.

    It goes to show that fake indignation throws logic out the window.

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    July 10, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    This issue will only get uglier. It was never truly intended to be a matter of fairness, but a way to force people who do not agree with the gay lifestyle into accepting it; especially certain religious groups - including LDS, Catholics and others.

    When ever someone simply states that they personally don't go along with GLBT ideals, they are immediately condemned as haters, bigots - often vandalized, or at least threatened. We've seen such responses more than once.

    Okay, so it's legal in several states, but now, the discussion is to remove tax free status of any traditional religious group which refuses to change it's doctrine.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 10, 2013 3:00 p.m.

    The LDS church did not call for boycotts that is true, however the far right has a long history of calling for boycotts not only against this musical but many companies including Starbucks Disney, jcpenney etc etc... again I do not have a problem with them doing so that is their right to not support these companies,, the line is crossed when people codify their hatred towards others in the form of laws such as prop 8, doma and amendment 3

  • very concerned Sandy, UT
    July 10, 2013 3:10 p.m.

    I do think however that free speech issues are involved here. I'm not talking about Orson Scott Card's free speech or any one else's in the article. I'm talking about the comments posted for the article.

    I'm seeing more and more postings that lean toward making anti-gay civil dialogue becoming "illegal". If a person actually disapproves of homosexual behavior, but talks in a civil manner, votes his conscience, and tries in a civil manner to persuade people to his/her way of thinking, and is not inciting violence, his rights to free speech are just as valid as anyone else's. There really are some who are trying to be civil and express sincere concerns without inciting violence or hatred.

    It is when someone does make a call for violence or acts violently that it becomes inappropriate. But, I would hate to see a nation in which we could not express our opinions because they are unpopular. That is what the first amendment is about. Unfortunately, this issue seems to be starting to move in the direction of curtailing anti-gay speech. Just my opinion.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    July 10, 2013 3:19 p.m.

    @very concerned
    So you seem to be able to post freely and without out censor so please tell us exactly how your free speech is being taken away on these threads? You get to use your free speech to express yourself and even refute others comments and guess what others get to do the same thing without you screaming censorship.

  • suan oro valley, AZ
    July 10, 2013 3:25 p.m.

    I am tired of the 3% trying to tell the 97% how to live. Maybe we need to boycott the advertisers of the shows that try and forced their live style on us. I will be taking a large group!!!!!!!

  • Balt Baltimore, MD
    July 10, 2013 3:40 p.m.

    Who is proposing to make "anti-gay civil dialogue illegal"? I haven't seen any such proposals. In my state - Maryland - the same-sex marriage law makes it clear that people can say whatever they want, and churches are not required to perform any marriage ceremony.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    July 10, 2013 4:11 p.m.

    Orson Scott Card, July 24, 2008, this paper, "Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary. ... Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die."

    And since NOM is still calling for a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, the point is hardly moot.

  • RAB Bountiful, UT
    July 10, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    I support this boycott. I wholeheartedly encourage people to punish themselves by denying themselves the enjoyment of a movie by an exceptional author. How dare he have views that are not 100 percent aligned with that of bigoted gay people!

    In fact, they are not taking this far enough. I advise that they deny themselves use of any theater that shows the movie, and movie by anyone in the movie or anyone that worked on the movie, any products shown in the movie or sold by the theaters that showed the movie, any visits to the state or country where the movie was made, any products sold in the country where the movie was made, and any association with people who exist on the planet where the movie was made.

    They'll show their opposition what happens to themselves if other people do not endorse and approve of their homosexual behavior.

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 4:29 p.m.

    @suan --

    "I am tired of the 3% trying to tell the 97% how to live."

    Suan, Mormons make up less than **2%** of the US population. Do you really want to start making arguments based on group size??

    Furthermore, more than 50% of the US population now SUPPORTS gay marriage -- according to multiple national polls.

    Again -- arguments based on group size will only work AGAINST you.

  • George New York, NY
    July 10, 2013 4:35 p.m.

    @suan

    two problems with that logic, first the the overwhelming majority of Americans including the LDS church support the 3 percent having basic civil rights and the majority of Americans support their right to marry.

    second thing the far right has a long long history of boycotting such shows and business's to no effect but please by all means keep trying.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 10, 2013 4:37 p.m.

    Re: "Bigotry is out in force today."

    It sure is! LGBT bigots are in full flower, showing their hate for anyone who dares to disagree with them.

    And, BTW, they are the ones that fail to understand that the Constitution applies to all Americans and that they don't have the right to combine with a tiny minority of Americans to extend new, unknown Constitutional rights to American factions, simply because they happen to like them.

    That's the very essence of the corruption that has destroyed the rule of law in any nation that has tolerates it.

    If LGBT activists believe they actually have a case, they should be honest in making it to voters, changing the law -- legislatively, as the Constitution requires -- to accommodate their practices.

    Rather than using current LGBT tactics -- bullying, boycotting, corrupting the legal system, using unethical and dishonest approaches to illegally force others to bend to their will.

    Those tactics ALWAYS backfire, in the end.

  • Jack in CC CULVER CITY, CA
    July 10, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    Well, in a way I suppose it's a good thing if all the people who want to back this bigot go see his movie. They'll have less money to donate to hate groups like the National Organization for (attacking non-traditional) Marriage.

  • DonP Sainte Genevieve, MO
    July 10, 2013 5:05 p.m.

    I wasn't going to comment on this, but then I had this thought. Two men write and produce a place which mocks a faith I hold dear and uses vulgarity and ridicule to elicit laughs from crowds that include the first lady of this country. What does the church do? Boycott? Attack? Unleash terrorist attacks on the White House? No. The church buys ads in the playbill, encouraging people to read the book. Now the shoe is on the other foot. The liberals of this country have a chance to show their tolerance and high mindedness towards a film which doesn't mock the gay lifestyle at all. Can they rise above their emotions and exercise a modicum of maturity and discretion? No. They reveal their true colors. They are rabid in their desire to attack and destroy all I hold sacred and dear.

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    July 10, 2013 5:07 p.m.

    Speaking of boycotts --

    As a board member of NOM, Card himself clearly believes that boycotts are acceptable forms of action.

    After all, the National Organization of Marriage is currently running TWO official boycott campaigns.

    One is called "Dump Starbucks" and the other is called "Dump General Mills".

    Both have links on NOM's home page, and both boycott sites specifically state: "a project of the National Organization for Marriage."

    So......

    If boycotts are acceptable to Card and NOM, why aren't they acceptable to everyone?? Hmmmmmmm??

  • postaledith Freeland, WA
    July 10, 2013 5:30 p.m.

    For those of you who say you'll see the movie, make it a family event, and eat at Chik-a-Fila on the way is really showing your true colors. Better get off your self-righteous pedestal before it breaks.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 10, 2013 5:35 p.m.

    The equating of boycotts to attacks (personal or otherwise), terrorism, and civil disobedience demonstrate how grossly reactionary the majority of DN readers are towards events that don't meet their own preferences.

    How sad.

  • Lightbearer Brigham City, UT
    July 10, 2013 5:42 p.m.

    Regarding "new, unknown Constitutional rights."

    The Constitution does not specify all the rights of the people. Many of our forefathers were opposed to including a bill of rights, because they knew it would be impossible to list them all, and they feared that those rights not listed would be lost. As James Wilson warned in 1787, "If the enumeration is not complete, everything not expressly mentioned will be presumed to be purposely omitted."

    The 9th Amendment to the Constitution confirms that the Constitution does not list all of the rights of the people: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    Just because a right is not named in the Constitution does not mean that it is new, or unknown, or that it does not exist.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    July 10, 2013 5:42 p.m.

    @very concerned;

    Actually, I couldn't care less if you disapprove of gays or not; that's your business, and you're welcome to believe whatever you want.

    Where I take issue is that you seem to think it is okay to use your beliefs to "vote" on whether or not I get the same rights you do. You don't have that right. You can tolerate us living lives that you disapprove of and I can tolerate your living a life that I disapprove of. I would never vote to deny you your right to believe whatever you want; why is it that you think your beliefs trump the individual rights of other Americans such that you get to encode them into law, forcing those other Americans to live by your beliefs?

    @suan;

    We "3%" are pretty darn tired of the 97% dictating how we can live. We're Americans and that means individual freedom, which seems to have escaped you.

  • Walt Nicholes Orem, UT
    July 10, 2013 6:05 p.m.

    Boycotts always amuse me. One person who is upset will certainly do whatever he or she is inclined to do. It is the truly hateful (read intolerant) who urge, nay, threaten, others to follow their lead.

    Like most commercial boycotts this will hardly be a blip on the radar (or profits) of what promises to be a truly great film!

    Hysterical, isn't it?

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    July 10, 2013 7:02 p.m.

    The LGBT "thought police" needs to be careful what they wish for. Like the Chick-fil-A hoopla, this might have the opposite effect.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    July 10, 2013 8:36 p.m.

    RE: Contrariuser, Many other Christian leaders have spoken out in SUPPORT of gay marriage. And many Christian denominations are already happy to perform gay weddings.

    According to LifeSite News, homosexuality is illegal in 38 African nations, including Senegal.

    Kenya’s Deputy President, William Ruto. Speaking at a Catholic Church, Ruto said, “Those who believe in other things, that is their business…We believe in God."

    Bible believing Christians DO NOT support gay marriage.

  • Doc1895 Chassell, MA
    July 10, 2013 11:41 p.m.

    The truth hurts.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    July 11, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    @Contrariusier (Contrarius) and Alt134:

    I know what Card said. I have read most of what he said and has written on the subject. I merely object to the twisting of his words that Contrarius did.

    Card said CHANGE government by whatever means necessary, not DESTROY it by whatever means necessary, as Contrarius stated.

    Card did not SAY he was for armed insurrection, as implied by Contrarius.

    By all accounts, Card is choosing "to destroy that government and bring it down" by being active in the community and the political and social process and by using his popular pulpit in exactly the same way other celebrities do. Have you seen him promote violence, pick up a gun, suggest mistreatment of Gays? NO.

    But because he holds strong opinions ant they do not correlate to yours, you feel the need to demonize him and twist his words, to be INTOLERANT of his RIGHTS, the very image of hypocrisy.

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    July 11, 2013 8:45 a.m.

    @sharrona --

    "According to LifeSite News, homosexuality is illegal in 38 African nations, including Senegal."

    -- And polygamy is still practiced in many African countries.

    -- And female mutilation is still practiced in many African countries.

    -- And adultery is still punishable by stoning in some African countries.

    What's your point?

    "Bible believing Christians DO NOT support gay marriage."

    Many Bible-believing Christians disagree with you.

    Here's some of the Christian denominations that already perform gay marriages and/or bless same-sex unions, or allow each diocese or priest/pastor to decide for themselves:

    --Anglican Church of Canada
    --Episcopal Church of US
    --Old Catholic, Reformed Catholic, and Liberal Catholic Churches
    --Church of Sweden
    --Church of Denmark
    --Church of Iceland
    --Danish Church of Argentina
    --Evangelical Lutheran Church of Canada
    --United Church of Canada
    --Protestant Church of Germany
    --Protestant Church of the Netherlands
    --Church of Norway
    --Evangelical Lutheran Church of America
    --Presbyterian Church USA
    --Quakers -- in several countries
    --United Church of Christ
    --Canadian Unitarian Council
    --Unitarian Universalist Association
    --Metropolitan Community Church
    --Mennonite Church of the Netherlands
    --Affirming Pentecostal Church International
    --Swedenborgian Church of North America
    --Uniting Church of Australia
    --United Church of Canada
    --New Apostolic Church
    --An LDS offshoot -- Community of Christ

  • Contrariuser mid-state, TN
    July 11, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    @J-TX --

    "Card said CHANGE government by whatever means necessary, not DESTROY it by whatever means necessary"

    I quoted Card's words exactly. It is easy to Google his op-ed piece, if anyone wants to verify what he said. "Whatever means necessary" is pretty clear.

    "Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, BY WHATEVER MEANS IS MADE POSSIBLE OR NECESSARY....How long before married people answer the dictators thus: REGARDLESS OF LAW, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is MY MORTAL ENEMY. I will act to DESTROY THAT GOVERNMENT AND BRING IT DOWN, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn."

    There's really not an adequate excuse for that kind of over-the-top polemic -- and, oddly enough, I don't think I've ever seen him retract it or apologize for its insurrectionist tone, either.

  • J-TX Allen, TX
    July 11, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    "...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

    -The Declaration of Independence

    We are just about there....

  • Central Texan Buda, TX
    July 11, 2013 11:07 a.m.

    I haven't read all of the comments, so I may be repeating, but having been a while since we've had real hype about a movie (outside of normal promotion efforts), I think this hype will only increase the box office take of this film. If a majority of people condemn a movie, it usually flops, but when a small minority condemns a movie, their numbers aren't missed but the hype drives other interest in the film.

    By the way, early on in the comments someone said they had only read ONE BOOK by OSC -- Seventh Son. Then they characterize the book as a retelling of First Nephi. Sorry, but the book based on the storyline of First Nephi would have been "The Memory of Earth". I never liked Seventh Son much. If THAT was the only OSC you've read then you need to try something else. Why not Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead? Then read Hart's Hope and imagine the book made into a movie by Peter Jackson.

  • NCPanther Logan/Cache, UT
    July 11, 2013 1:31 p.m.

    About 25 years ago when I was a little kid, we were in the car and my (straight) parents asked where we wanted to eat. We picked a restaurant we would go to often and then my parents started talking quietly in the front seat before my dad informed us we would not be going to that restaurant. We argued and asked why not, he replied, "they don't hire gay people there and that is wrong". I was just a little kid but I remember that. I don't remember whether or not I knew what gay meant but I knew it was wrong to treat people differently because of their sexual orientation, gender identity, religious beliefs, etc. For all of you who are saying that you will see this movie and buy your friends and family members tickets, not because you are interested in the moive but because those pesky gays are boycotting it, please think of the message you are sending to your children/family members/friends. There is no hate like hating in the name of (your) god.

  • O'really Idaho Falls, ID
    July 11, 2013 1:43 p.m.

    @Contrarius and Contariusier (same dude- thereby cheating on the DN comment rules)

    OK so something else found in nature is that some species copulate with multiple partners- within days or hours. Does that make it OK for humans to do so, too? Should my husband go off and mate with every woman he's attracted to?

    UNlike the animal kingdom, humans have the ability to reason and to control their "natural", animal-like instincts. We have to do this or all would be chaos. Just because you have an urge that is similar to something found in monkeys or penguins doesn't mean it's OK to act on it.

  • Eyes_Wide_Open OREM, UT
    July 11, 2013 2:07 p.m.

    Enders Game - Great book! Was almost forced into reading it, but loved it. And there are some pretty obvious homosexual overtones in there too.

  • baddog Cedar Rapids, IA
    July 11, 2013 2:27 p.m.

    I suppose the LGBT will hate me twice. I will see "Ender's Game," and I approve of the Second Amendment to the point of obtaining a CCW permit.

    To those who are intolerant, tolerance is not in their vocabulary. They ask us for tolerance. Many I know do not dislike LGBT people. They just do not approve of the strident animosity toward those who see life differently.

    I hope the best for all, including those who want to miss what looks to be a darn good movie due to intolerance.

  • MJM522 Draper, UT
    July 11, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    I would recommend a reading of Orson Scott Card's entire essay quoted in the article. You don't have to agree with him to understand that he is an intelligent, articulate defender of God's plan of happiness, and a student of societal consequence. He has no hatred for gay people, and I respect his refusal to be silenced by the those who would slander him with a definition for which ironically, they themselves perfectly qualify. "Bigotry: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's ethnicity, RELIGION, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics".

  • Beck to Harline Provo, UT
    July 11, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    @NCPanther

    Traditional marriage supporters do not see the support of their beliefs as "hating in the name of their god." They see it as actively supporting their god. Please think of the message you send when you say that people who legitimately believe in (and promote) traditional marriage are simply "hating in the name of [their] god."

    On the opposite side of the spectrum, same-sex marriage supporters undoubtedly believe that supporting same-sex marriage is right, and what their god wants them to do. The real problem with this whole debate is that neither side can seem to grasp the fact that people legitimately *believe* in what they support, whether it is same-sex marriage, or traditional marriage.

    As for the people that will see Ender's Game solely because it is being boycotted...the logic there is off. This is essentially an anti-anti-traditional marriage boycott. This is childish, and wrong.

    If you have read the book, go see it. If you want to see the movie, go see it. If you haven't read it/don't want to see it...don't. Personally, I can't wait. I loved the book.

  • Central Texan Buda, TX
    July 11, 2013 4:08 p.m.

    I have read a number of OSC's books. More than once he has written in characters with homosexual leanings. These characters are respectfully written as regular sympathetic characters, not pariahs or in any negative way. "The Memory of Earth" comes to mind.

    OSC is not an intellectual lackey. He studies and knows the issues, never touting a party line or religious stance simply because someone else is doing it. I respect his opinions even where I might disagree.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    July 11, 2013 5:17 p.m.

    RE: Contrariuser, What's your point? "Bible believing Christians DO NOT support gay marriage. "Many[NON]Bible-believing Christians disagree with you.

    The Bible teaches Pastors(shepherds),Bishops(overseers) and Elders should be men married to a women, not a man married to a man or a women married to a woman.

    A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;(1 Tim 3:2)

    …and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination.(Titus 1:5-6)

  • teeoh Anytown, KY
    July 11, 2013 5:47 p.m.

    NCPanther, I find your story and analogy interesting. With all due respect, I see it quite differently. I plan to see this movie, and pay full price in the theater (rather than wait for a DVD rental, as I usually do). And the message I would be sending my kids is that I want to support the victim (Orson Scott Card) in this hate-based boycott, just as your father had the victims of discrimination in mind in making his decision.

  • Contrariuserer mid-state, TN
    July 11, 2013 6:30 p.m.

    Contrariuserer
    mid-state, TN
    @O'really --

    "Does that make it OK for humans to do so, too?"

    Nope.

    As I've stated before -- "natural" doesn't mean either "right" or "wrong". It simply **is**. I offer it simply in rebuttal to the people who claim that homosexuality is unnatural. In fact, it is NOT unnatural. And, in fact, it DOES have survival/selective value, even though it is not directly reproductive. But, again, survival/selective value doesn't make something "right" or "wrong", either.

    @J-TX --

    "We are just about there...."

    Don't exaggerate.

    We are nowhere near the upheaval that preceded the Civil War, or the riots and unrest of the 60s. No National Guard troops have been called out to protect gay couples as they enter into courthouses to get married.

    You do reinforce an important point, though. Specifically: every time someone like Card starts spouting craziness like "any government that attempts to change it is **my mortal enemy**. I will act to **destroy that government and bring it down**," other people feel more empowered to talk and think in insurrectionist terms as well.

    Speech like this only encourages more people to act on their hatred.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    July 11, 2013 6:38 p.m.

    C'mon, Contrariuserer. We all know that OSC isn't crazy. Did you really take what he said seriously?

  • Contrariuserer mid-state, TN
    July 11, 2013 6:55 p.m.

    @teeoh --

    "I want to support the victim (Orson Scott Card) in this hate-based boycott"

    How is this boycott different from the boycotts beings carried on by NOM?

    @sharrona --

    "The Bible teaches Pastors(shepherds),Bishops(overseers) and Elders should be men married to a women, not a man married to a man or a women married to a woman."

    According to YOUR interpretation of the Bible.

    Many Christians disagree with your view.

    And, oddly enough, their beliefs are every bit as valid as yours.

    "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;(1 Tim 3:2)"

    This is a good illustration of how different translations will say different things.

    For instance, here's the NIV version: "Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach."
    -- IOW, it is focusing on FAITHFULNESS, not the specific gender of his spouse.

    Since yours mentions "bishops", I'll also point out that Catholic bishops should actually have NO spouses. ;-)

    Yup, strangely enough -- many people of differing denominations actually do disagree on what the Bible tells them to do!

  • TA1 Alexandria, VA
    July 11, 2013 7:14 p.m.

    I am more inclined to say that Orson Scott Card is not a victim of the LGBT community - he is merely "reaping that which had sowed". You can go through life and believe that you can say and do anything because "it is what I strongly believe it or I have the right to free speech" - but - it will always come back to haunt you. (Remember the words of Janis Joplin in the Kris Kristopherson son "Me and Bobby McGee" "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose" - can't say history didn't warn you Mr. Card.

  • teeoh Anytown, KY
    July 11, 2013 8:03 p.m.

    @Contrarius

    I don't think this boycotts and the NOM boycotts are very different. They both have a huge gap between the product and the producer. For example, I'll buy cheerios (despite the General Mills boycott), but I'll pass on Lucky Charms with gay pride rainbow marshmallows. I'll listen to Elton John music, but not if a song of his directly advocated something I disagree with (I'm not aware of any of his songs like that). In other words, it makes more sense to target a PRODUCT than the PRODUCER of that product.

    In this case, I'm choosing to support OSC, in part, as a way of showing what a stupid boycott this is. I don't make this decision based on any animosity toward the group calling for the boycott. I make this decision based on the idiocy of their decision make a pro gay statement by boycotting a movie about aliens attacking Earth.

    @TA1

    I didn't say OSC was a victim of the LGBT community. He is the victim (target) in this boycott. Regardless of which side you take, that is an accurate statement.

  • JediMormon Omaha, NE
    July 11, 2013 8:12 p.m.

    I listen to the music of Elton John, even though I disagree with his life-style.

    All you LGBT's who hyperventilate just becaus some author you don't like has a movie made from a book he wrote, need to CHILL OUT! Truth be told, all you folks are doing is guarenteing a larger turnout at the theater. Even angry publicity is still free publicity. Sign a pledge not to see the movie? Your right to request that of others, but a joke in the end. I suspect that some who had not read the novel for whatever reason will read it now, just to see what the hub-bub it about. You would have been better off just yawing and acting like the movie is no big deal. Instead, you are increasing the public's awareness of Card, which will benefit him far more than it will benefit you.

  • MrTuscadero Houston, TX
    July 11, 2013 8:55 p.m.

    All Science fiction is social satire, and some people cannot take satire that hits home. As one reveiwer told a Soviet diplomat who was unhappy with the depiction of the treachery of the Cylon Empire in the cinematic release of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA in 1978: "If the horns fit, wear them."

  • NCPanther Logan/Cache, UT
    July 12, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    Beck to Harline, I didn't have any mention of marriage eqality in my post. I was simply stating, in my opintion, people that are "going to the movie and buying tickets for their family and friends" because some folks in the LGBT community are boycotting, need to think of what kind of message may be sent. The message my father sent to us was that even though people might be different, and think differently, and believe differently, doesn't mean that we treat them differently. I personally think if people want to see the movie then go see it, if not don't. Which is sounds like you and I agree on. And on the whole god thing, if you feel like your god needs your support then go for it, as long as it doesn't infringe on others rights.

  • NCPanther Logan/Cache, UT
    July 12, 2013 10:28 a.m.

    Teeoh, if that is the message you want to send, I think that is fine (not that my approval is needed), I was simply asking people to think about the message they are sending. I personally don't care either way, I don't have a real stake in this. "Victim" seems to be a strong word in the particular situation, though.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    July 12, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    @baddog;

    Pretty amusing that you claim we're not "tolerant". You don't know that that means. Tolerance does NOT vote on whether other Americans get the same rights you do. Tolerance does NOT go around trying to make amendments forbidding other Americans from doing what you do. Tolerance DOES live and let live.

    @MJM522;

    It is interesting that you highlighted religion and didn't highlight sexual orientation.

    "Bigotry: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's ethnicity, RELIGION, national origin, gender, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics".

    Card's actions fit quite well within that definition you printed.

    @Beck to Harline;

    "Traditional marriage" proponents need to realize that allowing gays to marry does NOT change "traditional" marriages.

    @teeoh;

    I find it interesting that you can turn Card, one who persecutes the LGBT community into a "victim".

  • FT1/SS Virginia Beach, VA
    July 12, 2013 12:40 p.m.

    I had no plans of watching the movie, but I will now. The lgbt community are hypocrites. They demand tolerence, but will give none back.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    July 12, 2013 1:58 p.m.

    RE: Contrariuser, here’s the NIV version: "Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach. "not the specific gender of his spouse. “This is a good illustration of how different translations will say different things.

    True, When you isolate the text and don’t read Greek ,i.e..

    Let the deacons be the husbands=(arrhen,male) of one wife(*gyne) ruling their ‘Children’ and their own houses well. (1 Tim 3:12),

    … appoint elders=(presbyterian) in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one *wife and his ‘Children’ are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination.(Titus 1:5-6)

    The Pastor/Elder’s requirement for leading a church, is to have order in his home, which speaks volumes. The typical householder of Greco-Roman society. The male wife and children.

    In Mt 19:5, Jesus refers to (Gen 1:28). "Be fruitful and multiply” Marriage, isn't merely a moral union of compatible soulmates but a real union meant ideally for children.

    *Like,gynecology.

  • CBAX Provo, UT
    July 12, 2013 10:01 p.m.

    What all of you don't realize is that this is just another corporate scheme to increasemovie revenue while generating more media attention. All at the expense of us, "we the people".

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2013 10:19 p.m.

    Yeah, I have to agree with those who believe that we all have a right to respectfully disagree with those whose ideas of morality are contrary to our own. I hadn't planned on seeing Ender's Game, but with the intolerant and bigoted views of the LGBT community towards straight folks, I think I will take all my family and friends to see it.

  • Claudio Springville, Ut
    July 12, 2013 10:31 p.m.

    Re: Meckofahess

    "Yeah, I have to agree with those who believe that we all have a right to respectfully disagree with those whose ideas of morality are contrary to our own."

    As we all should, if we truly are good Christians and law-abiding Americans.

    "I hadn't planned on seeing Ender's Game, but with the intolerant and bigoted views of the LGBT community towards straight folks,"

    Well, so much for adding you to the list of people with common sense. You do understand how your second statement completely undermines your first one, right?

  • twells Ogden, UT
    July 13, 2013 7:14 a.m.

    The words being thrown around such as homophobic, bigots etc are very strong words. How about we learn to accept different opinions and call it a day. Remember we live in a country that allows diversity. We have taken to the extremes within groups that chose to not follow tradition. There are always unintended consequences for extreme behavior. Hate does nothing but destroy.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    July 13, 2013 9:23 a.m.

    Lets run a little balance sheet here:

    OS Card: enjoys a legal marriage to the spouse of his choice, recognized in every state in the country as well as almost every foreign country;

    LGBT: have been fighting, and have still not fully achieved marriage equality in most states and many countries

    OS Card: Has actively participated and made public statements to the effect that if the US government supports marriage equality, righteous citizens should throw off that government by any means necessary, even if just as a matter of principle;

    LGBT: have never done anything to remove, diminish, or detract from OS Card's enjoyment of marriage and all that entails; LGBT have never said anything disparaging about OS Card's marriage or sexuality, and have certainly never threatened revolution over the rights Card enjoys.

    So how is it NOT disingenuous and hypocritical for Card to call for "tolerance" and imply that LGBT are "intolerant" by not wanting to go see the film made by an avowed enemy of their civil rights?

  • Contrariuserer mid-state, TN
    July 13, 2013 10:12 a.m.

    @sharrona --

    "True, When you isolate the text and don’t read Greek"

    And for some strange reason you think that you read Greek better than the NIV translators do???

    LOL!!

    "In Mt 19:5, Jesus refers to (Gen 1:28). 'Be fruitful and multiply'"

    And yet Paul told us that it is better to remain single than to marry.

    Hmmm.

    -----

    And to get back on topic --

    There's an article in the NYT on the movie and the boycott this morning. Here's two interesting paragraphs from it:

    "In a statement, Lionsgate, Summit’s corporate parent, noted that it has released movies with gay themes, including 'The Perks of Being a Wallflower,' and has long recognized same-sex unions and domestic partnerships in its own corporate benefits programs. It said the company does not agree with Mr. Card's personal views or those of the National Organization for Marriage.

    "The simple fact is that neither the underlying book nor the film itself reflect these views in any way, shape or form," the statement said. It also said Lionsgate expects to host a benefit premiere for some gay-related cause in connection with 'Ender's Game.'"

  • MrTuscadero Houston, TX
    July 13, 2013 10:47 a.m.

    The GLBT's have their own modern-day version of the "Danites." Any word of any activity from them regarding this movie?

  • bored Lindon, UT
    July 13, 2013 12:11 p.m.

    I hope it's not news to anyone that the LGBT community is actually the most intolerant of any group out there. The right to disagree with them is inherent in our very DNA - they have that same right. The problem is when they attempt to label others as "evil" for disagreeing with them. Kind of an interesting dilemma...of their own creation.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    July 13, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    It's McCarthyism at its best. Go ahead and boycott. No one cares and more people will go and see the movie. Talk about stupid. Having an opinion differing from homosexuals is not against the law, yet. And still within our First Amendment rights. Any by the way, just because people think that homosexuality is wrong doesn't mean they hate or are against peoples rights. I don't care if people choose to live together outside of normal heterosexual marriage. That's their choice. I don't agree with it but it is their choice. Anyone can enter into a contractual agreement with another party. Marriage isn't a requirement to make such a contract. I personally know many homosexuals. I don't know a one that has been discriminated against in housing, jobs, who they live with, etc.

  • kvnsmnsn Springville, UT
    July 13, 2013 2:11 p.m.

    I decided to boycott Orson Scott Card a long time ago, shortly after reading Xenocide, the third installment in the series Ender's Game started, but it had nothing to do with Card's attitude towards gays; I simply thought Xenocide was an extremely poorly written book, and decided I didn't want to subject myself to that kind of torture any more. It's probably been at least fifteen years since I've read anything by Card. But I've started wondering if maybe I should give Card a chance again. I will be watching the Ender's Game movie.

  • Vaughn J Kearns, UT
    July 13, 2013 10:46 p.m.

    The LGBT community has developed an attitude that anyone that has an opinion that differs from theirs is homophobic and is in the wrong. Card's opinion on same sex marriage is that his personal opinion and belief. I have a similar opinion. I think that marriage should be a religious affair and each religion may accept or require that marriage ceremonies be solemnized separately within each separate religion. The states should provide for Civil unions to provide the legal benefits for spouses of any unions. This would allow the religious and conservative individuals to continue with their idea of marriage between a man and woman with the religious community and provide the financial benefits in the secular community.

    The LGBT community represent about 4-5% of the population. The idea that the remainder of the population should bend to their will in all things is absurd.

    If some conservatives were to try and obtain a marriage license in California for a Polygamous group and for a siblings, where current law outlaws it then either these become legal marriages, the same as same-sex, or the idea that the California law can define marriage between a man and woman is validated.

  • kvnsmnsn Springville, UT
    July 15, 2013 1:37 p.m.

    Vaughn J posted:

    =The LGBT community represent about 4-5% of the population. The idea that the
    =remainder of the population should bend to their will in all things is absurd.

    Vaughn, you made some interesting points in the first paragraph of your post, but I feel compelled to conclude that this second paragraph here is flawed. Blacks were also a minority in 1864; a similar line of reasoning would have argued against the Thirteenth Amendment and returned blacks to slavery after the Civil War. Democratic nations do follow the will of the majority most of the time, but they also are often characterized by having laws that protect minorities.

    =If some conservatives were to try and obtain a marriage license in California
    =for a Polygamous group and for a siblings, where current law outlaws it then
    =either these become legal marriages, the same as same-sex, or the idea that the
    =California law can define marriage between a man and woman is validated.

    I wasn't quite sure what you were saying here in this third paragraph. If you meant to say that polygamists have as much right to marry as gay couples do, I think you've got a point.

  • Contrariusest Nashville, TN
    July 15, 2013 4:17 p.m.

    @Vaughn J --

    "The LGBT community represent about 4-5% of the population."

    The LDS community represents less than 2% of the US population.

    Do you REALLY want to start making arguments based on community size?

    According to multiple national polls, more than 50% of the voting public now supports gay marriage. Again -- do you really want to start making arguments based on percentages?

    As for polygamy and incest -- the state has a vested interest in keeping both of these types of relationships illegal, because of the risks of harm that go along with both practices. In contrast, consensual homosexual marriages cause no harm to anyone -- and, therefore, the state has no interest in preventing them.

    @Flashback --

    "It's McCarthyism at its best."

    Card has been a board member of NOM for years. NOM currently has two boycotts running -- one against General Mills, and the other against Starbucks.

    If Card thinks that boycotts are acceptable, why don't you?

  • kvnsmnsn Springville, UT
    July 15, 2013 5:09 p.m.

    Contrariusest posted:

    =As for polygamy and incest -- the state has a vested interest in keeping both
    =of these types of relationships illegal, because of the risks of harm that go
    =along with both practices. In contrast, consensual homosexual marriages cause
    =no harm to anyone -- and, therefore, the state has no interest in preventing
    =them.

    First off, I'm not arguing for legalizing incest. I don't know how that got into the discussion. But what risk of harm is there in legalizing marriage of consensual polygamous triples, where all parties are adults? Granted divorce might be thornier, but if the triple signs a document detailing exactly what would happen in the case of a divorce, who are we to say they can't get married?