It is not that he worships a god which only blesses certain marriages. It is that he opposes equal treatment under the law. All gods are imaginary. The people Card wants to harm are real.
It's not a point of view I necessarily agree with, but it is a legitimate point of view that could be argued, as opposed to (say) gay people are paedophiles, which is clearly stupid.
Read Ender's Shadow and you'll find an example where he doesn't treat homosexuality with respect or dignity.
Re:Ender's Game Trailer Out Tomorrow
by fennecfoxen on Monday March 25, 2013 @09:49AM
(#5436914)
Could you provide more specifics here? There was a good amount of that book which wasn't to like, as it was inferior in quality to the other Ender-related works, so I wasn't paying the bestest of attention, and it's also been a while, but I didn't notice any overt incidents where the writing served to degrade the status of homosexuals as people, and I can't find any particular references on Google. (If you want to hear homosexuals and supporters of homosexuality degraded as illegitimate actors in the sociopolitical arena and the like, Card did a speech in 1990 which did that, which I'm sure you've seen, though the general public should be aware that claims that it's no longer an accurate representation of his views, which I guess is good because it's been like 23 years and anyone who sticks with an idea in one form exactly for 23 years either isn't much of a thinker or hasn't been paying any attention to reality).
The closest I've found is someone's article writing about how Card generally doesn't depict homosexuals - or, for that matter, depict very much sex in general.
There was a passage where I think Bean found Volescu, who strongly insinuates that he is gay even though he believes homosexuality is wrong.
Sorry, I can't be much more specific about this - I only read the book once about 10 years ago and did not hang onto it when I moved abroad.
Re:Ender's Game Trailer Out Tomorrow
by pavel_lishin on Monday March 25, 2013 @10:35AM
(#5437148)
Volescu wasn't gay; the scientist Anton was the one for whom homosexuality was strongly implied. And while I see what you mean about him not really treating homosexuality with respect/dignity - spoiler alert, gay character marries a woman and decides that having children is the end-all final meaning of human civilization - he doesn't exactly demonize the character, either.
But do realize that the guy treats homosexual people with similar levels of dignity and respect as any other human being, at least in the likes of his writing. If you doubt this and wish to see examples in his literature, please read his novel _Songmaster_ - a novel which caught Card a lot of flak from conservative groups who accused it of glorifying homosexuality.
(If you still doubt this afterwards, well, okay, maybe it won't convince everyone, but you'll be much better informed about the nature of the problem and your opinion will have nuance).
Anyway. For what it's worth, I'm sure a lot of interesting authors like C. S. Lewis, J. R. R. Tolkein, and many of their less obvious contemporaries would find themselves in a non-dissimilar position if the issue were one in their times - as would a variety of Christian groups opposing gay marriage and similar causes today.
For this reason I find the outcome of the recent Card/Superman hullabaloo disappointing and distressing. It is nigh unto unthinkable that you would actual find any representation in a Card-authored Superman comic which would be anything less than perfectly charitable towards homosexuals - and more likely he would just steer clear of stuffing modern sociopolitical controversies into it. (And it's nice to escape those once in a while, you know? like in comics and stuff. :P)
DISCLAIMER. No further comment is offered herein on the validity or invalidity of gay marriage, related causes, or any group which has opinions on those issues, except maybe for the likes of Westboro Baptist, which almost everyone ever knows is something like the worst people ever. :P
(Postscript. Also, notwithstanding above comments and expression of disappointment, the overall validity of Orson Scott Card or his works is left as an exercise to the reader. But your opinions would be improved by, and deserve to be shaped by, nuance. :)