Orson Scott Card and Superman: The thorny strategy of stoking fan rage

Feb. 14, 2013 | 12:24 p.m.
Orson Scott Card, right, will write "Adventures of Superman" No. 1. (DC Comics; Starscape)

Orson Scott Card, right, will write “Adventures of Superman” No. 1. (DC Comics; Starscape)


Superman is a character that stands for truth, justice and the American way, but should creators who work on his comics be held to that same level of virtue?

Last week, DC announced “Adventures of Superman,” a new series reprinting comics that are initially released digitally, and the first issue features a story by Aaron Johnston and Orson Scott Card. Card is a staunch, vocal opponent of homosexuality and a board member of the National Organization for Marriage, a group actively working to keep same-sex marriage illegal, and his personal views have Super-fans furious.

At last check, an online petition to remove Card from the title is 732 signatures short of its goal of 10,000, and stores in Dallas and San Francisco have publicly announced that they won’t be carrying the first issue of “Adventures of Superman.”

These attempts to get the publisher to change its decision have proved futile, and DC released the following statement to the Advocate on Tuesday:  “As content creators we steadfastly support freedom of expression, however the personal views of individuals associated with DC Comics are just that — personal views — and not those of the company itself.”

"Ultimate Iron Man," written by Orson Scott Card. (Marvel Comics)

“Ultimate Iron Man,” written by Orson Scott Card. (Marvel Comics)

This is not Card’s first foray into the world of superhero comics, and there was a backlash when Marvel gave him two “Ultimate Iron Man” miniseries, but “Iron Man” is not Superman. Marvel’s mechanized Avenger has skyrocketed in popularity since his first feature film, but he’s not in the same league as DC’s flagship hero, who stands as the pinnacle of physical, mental and emotional perfection.

Superman cares about everyone, regardless of race, age or sexual orientation, and the argument has been made that Card’s prejudices make him unqualified to write the idealistic figure.

My personal stance is that a writer’s beliefs shouldn’t determine whether he’s qualified for work, and if he has the skills to tell a strong story, he should be given the opportunity. It’s an editor’s obligation to make sure that the writer doesn’t let personal opinions affect the established voice of the character, and it’s unlikely that Superman is going to take on a new mission terrorizing gay weddings under Card’s pen. (Although considering DC’s current DC editorial regime, I may have just spoiled the first issue of “Adventures of Superman.”)

It’s possible that Card has a great take on the hero, and as a prolific, award-winning writer, it makes sense that DC would pursue him, especially with the controversy around his name. DC Comics has thrived on controversy since Bob Harras took over as editor-in-chief, beginning with The New 52, which started off strong but has turned into a mess of crossovers, cancellations and creative team shifts.

Erasing years of continuity and relaunching all of their books made a lot of long-time fans angry, which got them talking and helped stoke interest in the new #1s. The same strategy was used for “Before Watchmen,” a subject that the entire comics community remains fiercely opinionated about, and Card on “Superman” is the latest in fan-enraging announcements that will gain the publisher free publicity.

“Adventures of Superman” #1 is going to sell a lot of copies, probably a lot more than later issues with more desirable creative teams, and that’s not including the digital sales from anyone who has access to a smartphone, tablet or computer.

Where the Card controversy differs from “The New 52” and “Before Watchmen” is that DC has now alienated a significant portion of their audience at a time when they need all the support they can get. The industry has become too competitive for a publisher to risk losing readers over free PR. DC doesn’t seem to understand that the choices it makes now are going to have consequences down the road. Hopefully this past weekend’s DC Writers’ Retreat will result in a stronger direction for the publisher’s books.

A writer’s personal opinions shouldn’t affect his qualifications, but when those opinions are as public and enthusiastic as  Card’s, DC should think about how the decision to hire him is going to be interpreted by its readers. If someone chooses to boycott DC because of this, there are plenty of other places they can spend their money.

Marvel, Image and Dark Horse are producing captivating, distinct superhero comics, and Monkeybrain, Thrillbent and Shiftylook are working to expand the digital landscape. Signing an online petition is a way that readers can make their feelings known, but ultimately the dollar is more powerful than the keyboard.

— Oliver Sava

Oliver Sava is an Eisner Award-nominated journalist who writes about comics and television for The A.V. Club. He also covers theater as a staff writer for Time Out Chicago.

Follow us on Twitter: @LATHeroComplex


alanmoore Orson Scott Card and Superman: The thorny strategy of stoking fan rage

If ‘Watchmen’ is a bible, are prequels heresy?

‘Watchmen’ prequel: ‘Silk Spectre’ No. 1

Darwyn Cooke goes past the darkness of ‘Watchmen’

Dave Gibbons on his ‘Watchmen’ guilt

‘Watchmen’ prequels: DC dares to expand on classic

Neal Adams: talks ‘Superman vs. Muhammad Ali’

Jim Lee reflects on a life in art — and the art of life

The Joker returns to ‘Batman’ pages

Gay characters enjoying new prominence, tolerance

Women in comics and the art of equality


96 Responses to Orson Scott Card and Superman: The thorny strategy of stoking fan rage

  1. Van says:

    This title is officially dropped from my weekly pull list. Shame on DC.

    • Chambers Stevens says:

      Me too!!!

    • Dean says:

      I had no idea DC would let someone of this character be part of the creative process. I'm embarrassed to be an employee of Time Warner who owns DC.

    • sickened says:

      So…people who are supposedly all about tolerance, and are looking to have their views accepted….are turning on someone else who has their own opinions (which they have a right to as well) and saying because this guy thinks different his works should be subject to boycott, which affects the livelihood of his family and himself? Way to go for tolerance! Just once I'd like to see a community say "you know what, we live in America. We have the right to believe and do what we do, and so does everyone else!" But that will never happen, because in the name of "tolerance" we boycott people and companies left and right. Fortunately, the majority of America WON'T boycott this movie because of the personal beliefs of this author. It's religious persecution in this case. The gay community should be proud of themselves…NOT!!

    • McJsA says:

      Oddly reminescent of the Hollywood blacklists. Dashiell Hammet, writer of the Maltese Falcon, for instance, was frozen out as a "Communist sympathizer". That, he may have been though you will find little evidence of red menace in his books. Irrational fear of disagreement seems to be something of an American tradition. Check out Card's essay, "unlikely events" on the Onery American website. He's more vocal than Hammet, but everyone's got a right to be slightly unhinged.

  2. Ronnie says:

    What a writer/artist does on his/her own time is his/her own business.
    If they're good at their craft, I'll read their work, even if I find their personal beliefs abhorrent.
    You have no idea how many creators (both male and female) are, racists, misogynists and/or sexualphobes (to one extent or another) in their personal lives, yet produce material you praise, admire, and buy!
    As long as Card's work isn't "out of character" for the Man of Steel, I'm willing to take a look at it.

    • Jacob says:

      There's a difference with having an opinion and actively participating and supporting hate organizations, which are trying to put down a group of people. If Card was solely a bigot but kept it to himself I don't think people would mind as much.

    • johnrj08 says:

      You know, I think a lot of people read "Mein Kampf" despite knowing who wrote that one. But the reason they read it is because they're curious about how a monster's mind works… or doesn't work. In Card's case, he's a celebrity in the comic book culture, and he's working on an iconic character which is heavily associated with justice and fair play, etc. The fact that Card is very outspoken about his views demonstrates that he has no idea he's a homophobe. If the fans in the comic book community, especially the fans of this character, don't like having someone like him associated with Superman, then they will express that dissatisfaction here and in the marketplace.

    • Bret says:

      I started reading Card when I was in college. I could tell then, in his writing, how he views women and men who are not his ideal of masculine. I stopped reading then and will not support him in any way, even if that means giving up on Superman comics. "As long as Card's word isn't out of character" – doesn't matter. He's being paid by Marvel, right? I will not support anyone who has views such as his. As long as he belongs to hate groups that is what he is going to get in return.

  3. MrTemecula says:

    Card is a terrific writer, but ever since 9/11, he's become a fascist, so this is a perfect pairing since Superman is often a quasi-role model for right wing extremists. I hope DC loses millions of readers.

    • Joe says:

      Funny, being dependent on a higher authority for protection and guidance sounds a whole lot like both the Democrats' and Republicans' wet dream. The rhetoric may vary, but the their love affairs with telling the little people how to live their lives are all too similar. In our brave new world, fascists exist on the far left as well as the far right.

      • MrTemecula says:

        What's funny is libertarians/independents' personal sense of superiority, except when they have to chose between civil liberties vs economic liberties, they seem to choose the money all the time.

    • jon says:

      While the sentiment is admirable, DC doesn't have millions of readers to lose.

    • Gabe says:

      I wish DC (and comics in general) HAD millions of readers…

  4. Richard says:

    If he makes Superman a homophobe or makes all the villains homosexual, by all means
    boycott the product. Thing is, I've read his works for years and never knew that he had those

    The concept of attempting to deprive a person a livelihood/job because of his views is unAmerican.
    For those people who think this is OK, consider what might happen when the pendulum swings
    the other way and someone with power does not like YOUR views.

    And no, I'm not saying I agree with him, but he's not a politician or public servant so his private views are just that.

    • Dave says:

      "The concept of attempting to deprive a person a livelihood/job because of his views is unAmerican."

      Are you okay with people being fired from their jobs just for being gay? Firing someone for being gay is still legal in most states, and it's one of the many things that Orson Scott Card and NOM advocate for. And that's not OSC's "private view" by the way… he's very vocal and public about advocating for laws that discriminate about gays and lesbians.

      • Ronnie says:

        "Firing someone for being gay is still legal in most states…"
        Actually, in "right-to-work" states (where Republicans control the government) you can be fired for ANY reason, not just being gay.
        What states specifically allow firing for being gay, OTHER than right-to-work states?

    • Erich says:

      "The concept of attempting to deprive a person a livelihood/job because of his views is unAmerican."

      Boycotting a product is a free market, capitalism based response. I do not want my money to support a hate group, period. Who are you to tell me or anyone in this country how to spend their money?

      Most people buy based on an emotional appeal rather than a logical product feature, and that is true in entertainment.

    • jon says:

      The idea that anyone having to suffer any professional consequences for their statements and actions is "unAmerican" is patently absurd. Putting him in jail would be "unAmerican." People who let DC know how they feel about hiring a bigot to write Superman comics are exercising their rights to free speech, and nothing could be *more* American.

    • Alice says:

      The funny thing is, in Shadow Puppets, one of the sequels to Ender's Shadow, Card blatantly expresses his views on homosexuality and marriage when two characters are planning to start a family, and that was the point where I could no longer get through the book. Up until that point in the story, it is one of my favorite series. It's unfortunate, but many times authors' personal beliefs bleed into their work.

  5. Hindenburg says:

    Shame on folks who cannot really tolerate diversity after all. Let Card write.

    • johnrj08 says:

      Card is a public figure. That's the comic book culture. If he's going to be highly vocal about his bigotry, then you're not really talking about "diversity". You're talking about someone who is opposed to diversity.

      • radio1969 says:

        Same but different: At our Valentines dinner last night, the Gay & Lesbian couples got 2 roses, but my gal & I only got 1… I assume because we're a "straight" couple. That's not tolerance; it's discrimination. But apparently people who support "traditional values" are bigots & racists. Gees!

      • jon says:

        It's very sad that you didn't get a rose. It's a far bigger injustice than denying people the same basic civil rights that you take for granted. Woe is you.

    • Francis says:

      Being anti-gay is the opposite of tolerant.

      • Chuck says:

        Actually, no, it’s not. Tolerance is recognition of another’s right to an opinion or belief, while not necessarily agreeing with it. Anti-tolerance is NOT recognizing that, as in lambasting and directing ad hominem attacks at anybody who dares hold a point of view differing from that of the uber-PC crowd. Do I approve of homosexuality.? No. Do I hate homosexuals? No again. I believe that they have the right to do whatever they want, *in the privacy of their own bedrooms*, so long as nobody attempts to shove that behavior in MY face and convince me of its rightness. THAT is tolerance.

      • Claus Talon says:

        Well put. The problem is, when you become vocal with any stance that is not in agreement with the agenda of promoting public perversion you end up being labelled as a "Hater".

  6. johnrj08 says:

    This is disappointing. Comics are specifically directed at younger people. Not many 20 year olds read them. Some, but not many. To have a writer who is highly vocal about his bigotry working on this particular character is more than a little disturbing. Doesn't really just matter what's in the actual comic. His name and what it is associated with count as well.

    • Joe A says:

      Actually, statistics suggest that the vast majority of comic book readers are over the age of 30. One put 25% of readers over age 65.

  7. jaydubbya says:

    I have followed Card for years. I not only like what he writes, but I agree with his views on same-gender marriage. I don't know his views exactly on homosexuality, but I suspect from what I know of him (we went to the same college) that he believes homosexuality is a sin, but he feels tolerance and sympathy for individual homosexuals. If so, I agree with him there, as well.

    I am astounded that our society has arrived at the point at which we believe that someone who possesses such traditional morals would be considered less than virtuous, or that he should lose his job because he believes that marriage between a man and a woman should be maintained, and the politics of changing marriage are wrong.

    • KarenLaRae says:

      To me it is about fairness. You are entitled to believe homosexuality is a sin, and if so, do not engage in it (though you don't get any moral points for it if you aren't attracted to men). Being raised Mormon I am anti-adultry,so I have never gone within 50 feet of having any kind of affair with a married man even if I am attracted to him. There are serial cheaters who are not faithful at any point in their marriage — but it is still legal, and they still enjoy all the benefits of marriage until/unless the person they are married to divorces them. Personally, I am the most strongly against abusive marriages, but again — no matter how many times someone is arrested and convicted of even heinous abuse, they are still legally married and enjoy all the legal rights and protections. I have no right to tell you what is and is not moral, but to me it is not a morality issue because gay couples are the ONLY ones who are held to a morality standard in order to be married.

    • Dave says:

      Do you support the criminalization of homosexuality? Because Orson Scott Card does.

      • KarenLaRae says:

        What is your source? I have read many of Orson Scott Card’s books, and many of his newspaper articles online (I disagree with most of his political views, but I don’t believe in only reading/listening to people with my same opinions – plus I get a lot out of the other topics he discusses). I am pretty sure he supports DOMA, however, there is a HUGE gap between supporting DOMA and wanting to criminalize homosexuality. Card is entitled to lend his vocal and financial support to DOMA, just as I am entitled tolend my vocal and financial support to pro-gay marriage and pro-gay causes. But I believe in being fair — and if one is going to make a such a serious charge, you need to include the source.

    • Jeremiah says:

      There were a lot of people who were astounded that their society had arrived at a point at which the Supreme Court could force an integration of the races in school or overturn state laws banning miscegenation of the races. Those people were called racists back when it was en vogue to call a zebra a zebra even if it was hiding behind religious stripes.

      This world will be a better place when people like you are no longer a part of it.

  8. W Steinberg says:

    How can such a brilliant and sensitive writer be at the same time so closed minded? What are you afraid of Orson? I really love your books, but now this will color my interpretation of them. Sad.

  9. @carmitch says:

    For those who would buy the comics by Card, would you do the same had been in favor of Hitler and the Holocaust or MLK's death? If so, sad!

    • KarenLaRae says:

      So please tell me who am I allowed to read? If I am only allowed to read books from authors whose personal lives or views I 100% agree with, I'd be barred from reading some great literature. And since when is being pro DOMA the same as being pro-Hitler? I know several people who are pro DOMA, and while we are on opposite sides on that issue, they are still good, decent people. I firmly believe you and I have the right to lend our voice and our resources towards pro-gay marriage, but I don't see that dismissing everybody who feels differently furthers the cause.

    • Claus Talon says:

      Apples and oranges.

  10. Fletch says:

    The writer of this article is showing his bias.
    "should creators who work on his comics be held to that same level of virtue?" So, standing up for traditional marriage is not virtuous? Really?

    And rather than talking about "Card’s prejudices", I would say they are his values, and values that many comic book readers and Americans in general share. Rather than "super fans" being furious, it seems it's more the fury of gay liberals with an axe to grind who decry that fact that anyone dare think differently than they do.

    • Joe A says:

      Based on a quick look at a dictionary, "prejudice" seems to be the correct term in this case.

    • Dave says:

      No one is trying to take away "traditional marriage." And the majority of the country supports same-sex marriage in addition to traditional marriage.

    • Dave says:

      "Rather than "super fans" being furious, it seems it's more the fury of gay liberals with an axe to grind who decry that fact that anyone dare think differently than they do."

      Maybe it's just not fury at those "thinking differently", but the lies, stereotypes and bullying that go along with it and drives kids to suicide for being gay or even the "suspicion" that they might be gay. Pull your head out. It's not just having a difference of opinion. It's NOM and like bigots trying to legislate morality based on a hypocritical viewpoint that heterosexuals are more deserving of humane treatment. It's trying to demean, devalue gays (as one idiot special Ed teacher said just this week- gays and lesbians have no purpose), and create a climate where teens see no other option other than suicide and this writer feels quite comfortable letting his views do so. It's not a "liberal" or "gay" thing. That you think so is very ignorant.

    • Francis says:

      Being anti-gay is wrong.

    • jon says:

      No one needs to stand up for "traditional marriage," because A) "traditional marriage" does not exist in this country in the first place, and B) it is under absolutely no threat at all.

      Not even from those mean ol' "gay liberals."

    • Claus Talon says:

      Thank You.

  11. KarenLaRae says:

    One of my biggest pet peeves is that we have become so divisive that the "pro" people boycott those who are "anti" and the "anti" people boycott those they view as "pro" and they basically cancel each other out. This is true whether we are talking gay marriage, pro-life/pro-choice or other hot button topics. I am pro-gay marriage and consider myself gay friendly, but I believe others have the right to feel differently.

    Besides, many artistic endeavors have a variety of people involved. For example, if those who don't like Orson Scott Card decide they will boycott "Ender's Game" when the movie comes out … and IF (I have no idea) the director and or some of the actors are vocally pro-gay or gay and the "keep marriage between a man and woman" boycott it …. what's the point? In boycotting the person who disagree with … you are also probably also hurting someone else who supports your cause. People are more than one issue, and even if it is an issue I feel strongly about, I can’t dismiss an entire person based on a few differing opinions.

  12. John says:

    Oliver Sava says: "My personal stance is that a writer’s beliefs shouldn’t determine whether he’s qualified for work, and if he has the skills to tell a strong story, he should be given the opportunity."

    … and then says: "DC has now alienated a significant portion of their audience at a time when they need all the support they can get…. A writer’s personal opinions shouldn’t affect his qualifications, but when those opinions are as public and enthusiastic as Card’s, DC should think about how the decision to hire him is going to be interpreted by its readers."

    You can't have it both ways Oliver – either his beliefs don't make a difference or they do. I agree that it's a sad commentary when traditional values are so maligned. Which side is the HATE really coming from?

    • Dragoon says:

      Well, read it again, but slowly this time.

      Oliver Sava says: "My personal stance is that a writer’s beliefs shouldn’t determine whether he’s qualified for work, and if he has the skills to tell a strong story, he should be given the opportunity."

      These are his personal views, not the reality of the situation. He is saying how he thinks things SHOULD be, not how they are.

      "DC has now alienated a significant portion of their audience at a time when they need all the support they can get…. A writer’s personal opinions shouldn’t affect his qualifications, but when those opinions are as public and enthusiastic as Card’s, DC should think about how the decision to hire him is going to be interpreted by its readers."

      This is an observation on his part. He is saying that from a business and PR standpoint, they are hurting their image and alienating fans at a crucial point. Even here, he states that it shouldn't be this way, but that it is, and that DC should keep that in mind.

      That being said, I agree that an author's personal views should not determine his qualifications to write.

  13. Ricky_in_SGV says:

    Do the LGBT forces really want to set up a new black list? From reading this article it sounds like anyone who wants to keep the traditional definition of marriage is unfit to write a story or even hold a job. That's laughably simple-minded. I grant that there are people out there who despise homosexuals. Forget calling them homophobes, just call them evil. Card's arguments against gay marriage at least have some basis in reasoning as opposed to those who want DC to fire him because of his arguments.

  14. Frank Maunder says:

    As I recall it, Mr. Card is yet another one of those pop writers whose output is measured in either feet or pounds (your choice). As opposed to actual content.

    Still, that’s the style these days; from “Superheroes” to “Reality TV”. It’s been this way ever since we became the kind of society where X-Files came to be regarded as investigative reporting.

  15. Chone says:

    I have read Card for years and I find this whole issue rather curious. Because Mr. Card wrote about a homosexual encounter in a book published in 1978, "Songmaster". It was essential to the story and I don't remember Card putting homosexuality in a bad light in the story.

    • Jeremiah says:

      OMG…you're right! Card is actually not a giant douche who is actively contributing money for the purpose of stripping people of their civil liberties for the sole purpose of his own religious beliefs…because of that one plot device he used in 1978!

  16. Francis says:

    I don't like Card writing for Superman because so many kids, and especially youth who are bullied and picked on for who they are, look up to Superman and take so much from what Superman represents. Someone who stands up for the little man. Someone who cares about all. Someone strong, someone brave. Card goes 100% against what Superman stands for, and the people we're forgetting in all of this arguing are LGBTQ teens. One of the few things they can look up to without homophobic bias is being taken from them, and I'm not OK with it.

    • Jonny D says:

      Many of Card's works, including recent publications The Lost Gate (2010) and Enchantment (1999), the two I have most recently read, stand up for the 'little man' and for those who are bullied and picked on because they are different. Card includes, in a favorable light, homosexual characters in his books, too, and one is a major character in his Homecoming series. I think that LGBTQ teens, if they read Card's serious works (not including comics) will gain far more in deep ethical perspectives and questions of how people interrelate, than they will be scarred by any homophobic bias in his writings. DC readers and the youth community will be well served if Card brings the same serious ethical dilemmas to his comics that he has to the overall body of his fiction works.

  17. Jacques says:

    It's one thing to have personal views. To be actively involved in a group actively seeking to strip the civil rights away from an entire group of the American population, well that's another thing altogether.

    I was on the fence about dropping most if not all of my DC titles – this has pushed me over. Shame on you, DC.

    • Megan says:

      So according to you, if he wants to work in the arts, then he needs to limit his political speech? Free speech is free speech–he can be on whatever boards he wants. And readers are free not to buy the comic book. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with them lobbying DC comics to essentially fire him. That's not capitalism, its facism.

  18. Grand Inquisitor says:

    Let's investigate every writer and hold them to the only objective standard there is: perfection. If they don't pass the test, let's boycott them.

  19. Chris says:

    The people who say, "I'm for gay marriage, but I'm still going to buy Card's Superman story" are probably the same people who say, "I'm against violence against women, but I gotta buy that new Chris Brown single! The beat is just so good!" Come on, people. Have some class.

    • Atomic Kommie Comics says:

      ""I'm against violence against women, but I gotta buy that new Chris Brown single! The beat is just so good!" Come on, people. Have some class. "

      Tell that to Rihanna!

    • Ricky_in_the_SGV says:

      What is more likely is that someone will buy the comic hoping that the story is good. If not, they will say "Boy, what a waste of money that was! I won't by the next issue." But Chris you seem to already have pre-judged the work. In your mind, the story can't be good because you hate what Card believes in. I'll pass on that brand of tolerance and open-mindedness.

  20. Tom Kazanski says:

    Welcome to the new McCarthyism.
    Perhaps the ACLU will step in to protect Mr. Card's freedom of speech?

    • John says:

      Freedom of speech means that the government can't silence Mr. Card's viewpoints.

      It doesn't say DC has to hire him as a writer or that customers have to buy his books.

    • Erich says:

      You don't understand the concept of freedom of speech.

      That freedom does not mean I have to listen to it, and certainly not pay for it.

    • jon says:

      It's so amusing when people cite "freedom of speech" without possessing even the most rudimentary understanding of that that actually means.

    • Craig Ranapia says:

      Why? Mr. Card's First Amendment freedoms – including the right of NoM to call for boycotts of anyone who offer spousal benefits to same-sex couples are perfectly unmolested. But I guess I missed the clause in the Bill of Rights that said freedom OF speech includes freedom FROM criticism, or consequence. I'd also note the irony of right-wingers who don't much like how a free market actually works.

  21. Johnny says:

    America is a country that parodies Jesus Christ , Judaism, and Islam for comedy, but when someone has a comment about gays it's as if someone got murdered. If your moral values have double standards then don't hide behind your right to freedom of speech. If a man believes gay marriage is wrong, and you can't respect that, then you're forcing your values on them.

    • @Ansong_ says:

      That's ridiculous. They have a right to have those beliefs. I respect that right, not the beliefs themselves. Moreover, my beliefs and actions don't do any more than air my disapproval. His beliefs and actions strive to deny a subset of the population of their Constitutionally guaranteed civil rights.

      • tim says:

        wow, did not know that two men have a "Constitutional" right to get married… that was a big thing when the founders made the constitution

      • Jeremiah says:

        So what you're saying is that if a "right" is not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, then that right does not exist?

        Check out the 14th Amendment, section 1: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

        Law school was an amazing experience. It made me realize just how supremely ignorant self absorbed a-holes like yourself really are. But keep thinking that your 8th grade, Rush Limbaugh educated Constitutional understanding is top-notch. It makes it so much easier for people like me to have a distinct advantage in life.

      • Dragoon says:

        Actually, thats pretty much how it works here in America. If it's not in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, chances are it's a NO GO. Those are the go to documents for listing out your rights.If there is one that I am missing, that states some other rights that I have not mentioned therein, please feel free to inform me.

        Don't get me wrong, I'm pro gay marriage, but at the same time, I try and keep perspective, and stay aware of others views, both for and against, and try and respect their arguments, if they can make cohesive ones. I also don't let my personal beliefs affect my conduct and productivity in a professional setting.

    • Jeremiah says:

      You misunderstand "force." Not respecting a homophobe's opinion isn't forcing my values onto that homophobe. Drafting, lobbying for, and funding the implementation of laws that restrict the civil liberty rights of US citizens because a book put together in the 1500s says that homosexuality is naughty…THAT is forcing your values onto another person. Don't understand? Ok, try this out. You're a gigantic homophobic a-hole who probably sits around dreaming of the 1950s when you didn't have to worry about having to be nice to the "darkies" or worry about women in the work force.

      Did you read that? Did you lose any of your civil rights? Did the magic liberal fairy come down and pluck our your ability to voice your opinion? Nope. THAT is the difference between what you think is forcing values on another person and what Card's group is actually trying to do.

  22. Erich says:

    DC Comics is selling a product to make money. They are not donating their time or money to help anyone.

    Boycotting is a fine response in a supposedly free market society and has a proud history of furthering civil rights.

    It is confusing that anyone would argue DC's products should be bought by people who think the money will be used to fund Card's hate group.

  23. felix says:

    Let him write the damn book, all those taking issue with this can freely move on to other Superman books. No one said you HAVE to read this book. You don’t have a gun pointed at your head.

  24. Dan says:

    Card has the right to think and say what he believes. We also have the right to vote with our wallets, and while I respect Card's talent, I decided long ago not to give another cent of my money to him as long as he remains a mouthpiece of hate.

    • Megan says:

      But this petition is NOT "voting with our wallets." That would be simply deciding not buy the comic. That's not what this petition is asking for–its asking for DC to fire Card. Look, if he writes the book and no one buys it and DC decides not to hire him again, I have no problem with that. But asking them to give Card the heave-ho because you don't agree with his viewpoint–that's disturbing. As disturbing as those idiots who wanted JC Penney's to fire Ellen.

    • smith says:

      believing that a kid should have a mom and dad….. wow, the hate

  25. Rob says:

    Has political correctness become so rampant that we now must defend the monsters?

    Card's thoughts are toxic and wrong.

    We used to support DC, now they make this decision. So it is my right to demand Card be taken off.

    It is an insult, plain and simple.

    BIGOTRY can not be protected as a right, idiots!

    • Ricky_in_the_SGV says:

      Rob, I missed the part where Websters asked you to be the final word on the definition of BIGOTRY. If Card wanted Homosexuality to be illegal, that would be bigotry. If he wanted to fire any teacher who was gay, that would be bigotry. (In the '70s someone actually tried that.) Card's opinion about definiton of marriage was shared by President Obama less than 4 years ago. Did you call the president a bigot then? I guess if you pre-judge anyone who disagrees with you as being unfit to have a job if they dare say something in public, that must be some form of bigotry.

      • Chuck says:

        And guess what? He absolutely DOES have the right to be a bigot, by your definition or anybody else's. That's call Free Speech. You don't have to agree with him, or buy his stuff, or say hi to him on the street. But yes, it is indeed a right (so long as it's not a factor in legal-type stuff like hiring/firing/compensation, etc.)

  26. Alan says:

    I was never interested in Card's work until I saw some of the hate directed towards him in 2004 or 2005. I really don't like bullies or fascists so out of antipathy towards the creepy loudmouths who prefer to shout instead of think I gave Ender's Game a shot. It took a little getting into but at the end of the book I was impressed and decided to keep on reading. I liked the Shadow books, despised Homecoming, loved the Redemption of Christopher Columbus, and have generally enjoyed the rest of his work with the occasional bumo in the road. He tends to think outside the normal cultural boundaries that plague American writers and provides perspectives on diverse cultures that other writers rarely match. So I'm grateful for the loudmouths and bullies who attack him. Otherwise I'd have missed out on a very talented and unique storyteller. I used to spend around $75 to $100 a month on comics until 2002. At that point I felt like the editorial boards had no respect for anything outside of the East Village. So I haven't bought a comic book since then. Judging by sales figures since I started reading them as a kid I'm not the only one who got tired of the 'Teen People' mentality of the editors and the writers they sponsored. Since then the publishers have missed out on my money. DC will have at least one returning customer for Card's run, and if recent events are any indicator I won't be the only one. I'm looking forward to seeing the sales figures.

  27. Dave says:

    You had to rush out and buy Card's work, because he was being criticized for his public anti-gay statements?

    Would you be equally supportive of an outspoken racist who was being criticized? Or an outspoken misogynist? Or an outspoken Islamophobe? Or was it just the fact that he's anti-gay that made you want to put money in Card's pocket?

    • Ricky_in_the_SGV says:

      Gosh, Dave, Christopher Hitchens and Salman Rushdie could be considered "Islamophobes" but I bet you wouldn't want their publishers to have fired them. Similarly, a lot of women find "Bill Maher" to be misogynistic but you probably wouldn't want him to lose his show just for that. Honestly, if Card's story has Superman bashing gays then you have a case. I'm sure you will be disappointed and there won't be a hint of sexual politics anywhere in the book.

  28. Devyn says:

    If OSC was actively trying to limit the rights of blacks in America, DC wouldn’t hire him. I am disappointed in this decision because DC obviously doesn’t feel the same way.

  29. anoldfan says:

    Just DC stirring the pot to get publicity. Don't forget, this is the very same company that went out of it's way to alter the Green Lantern of Earth 2 to be gay. So what do we have here…a company that is homophobic for hiring Card to write a couple of Superman stories? Or a company that is pro-gay for making one of their major characters gay. I will admit, however, that I have no idea how the gay Green Lantern of Earth 2 went over or even if DC continues to publish comics dealing with that character.

  30. Stan G says:

    I'm 79 years old. Been a Superman Fan since the beginning. Had a crush on Eloise Sharkin in grade school, but as a shy kid who could barely talk to her, would often dream of flying to her rescue. I am also a Science Fiction fan since … well, forever, and have read two of Card's trilogies. Could tell he was a bit weird, what with the ghost stuff, but enjoyed the story telling. Hate to give up on Superman, at this late date, but I'll exercise my right to not support him, just as I believe he has a right to his views … as bigoted as they may be.

  31. Paul says:

    For those looking to defend Card on his reprehensible 'moral' stance as being 'his private views' I think you should re-read the article again:
    'Card is a staunch, vocal opponent of homosexuality and a board member of the National Organization for Marriage, a group actively working to keep same-sex marriage illegal, and his personal views have Super-fans furious.'
    If they were personal views that he didn't feel the need to share on a public stage, using his position as an established writer to do so, then I would simply write this off as Card being a bigoted ass and that would be that. But he has made these views VERY public, officially advocating for his bigotry. Not to mention that he has equated homosexuality with paedophilia and rape in some 'writings' on the subject, and that is just flat out wrong. I'm sorry, but bigotry is bigotry, and anyone who thinks a writer does not bring their own opinions and voice to a piece of writing, even one with a continuity as long as Superman's, is clearly deluding themselves.

  32. lando says:

    i heard david duke and tom metzger are working on a new batman!

  33. Jeremiah says:

    I love all the comments about how liberals can't really tolerate diversity because they want to boycott Card because of his beliefs. Imagine if Scott Card was advocating for laws mandating that the races could not intermarry because he believes in the purity of the races (by the way, this same argument is about 50 years removed from the modern era). I'm sure the same idiots would be on here saying, "OH and now you liberals show your true colors, you can't handle real diversity."

    Respecting diversity doesn't mean that I have to ignore the fascist activities of a homophobic goon.

    Oh and I'm a white, straight male. There are a few of us out here in the world that recognize homophobia for the ignorant, recessive plague that it is. Orson Scott Card and any company hiring him will get exactly zero of my dollars. Oh and D.C., I don't care how great a story the Grand Wizard of the KKK can right, if you have that a-hole reboot Batman…I'm not going to read your mags at all.

    This is me disrespecting the masquerade that is homophobic "diversity."

  34. Jimbo says:

    If I only read authors that I agree with on morality, I would be left with virtually nothing to read.

    Stop picking on OSC and just read the damn comic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

E-mail It
Powered by ShareThis