Orson Scott Card buys Marvel!

[Ice]

Um...wow.


And all this because OSC bought Marvel...


I'm afraid to ask what if...no- wait. Nevermind.

 

[Ultimate Houde]

That actually makes total sense.

They actually found a gene in fruit flies where males would court other males before females.

To put on my Houde Hat, there are actually a lot of valid reasons that I've heard for why homosexuality would exist from an evolutionary standpoint.

Evoluntionary as is biological, or as in society?

The key thing to consider is that evolution isn't just about the survival of individuals, but the species as a whole, meaning that even if a gay person never procreates, they are still contributing to the survival of the species. Population control is one obvious thing that people point to. Another would be the integration of the male and female brains: essentially, in a modern world where one's gender means less and less, having characteristics of both sexes could be beneficial. The theory I like the most is that homosexuality stabilizes communities. The more stable relationships there are in a species, be they between people of opposite sexes or the same sex, the more harmony there will be. If gay couples were allowed to marry in the US, it would probably strengthen marriage, and if they were allowed to adopt, millions of children who would otherwise grow up without parents would have a home.

Okay, first off, evolution is about survival of the individuals genetic makeup. That's all. What you are talking about here is a version of society, and how those individuals come together to form it. Now, a society can influence genetic makeup, but only when that individual in that society procreates. If said individual isn't procreating, it's not contributing to a genetic evolution, merely helping society.

This is purely on the genetic level mind you.

Except that it doesn't. Nature doesn't have a "reason" for why it does things. It merely has a blueprint. And sometimes the blueprints vary.

Try. Mutations happen, and if they are desirable, they stick around because the mutation procreates more often than not.

If you really want to get into theory, you could argue that a certain probability of homosexuality could be built into human DNA as a defense mechanism against extinction through overpopulation.

Cancer would be may guess for this.

 

[DIrishB]

Okay, so I havn't read that article. Thank you for the link.

Give me a second...

...okay, done.

While I do think that everyone deserves the same protections under the law regardless of marital status--something he doesn't address well one way or another--I don't think this article constitutes a hatred of homosexuality.

Biologically, there is no reason nature would make someone homosexual. Sociologically, with all of the anti-homosexual sentiment the world has, there is no reason anyone would choose to be homosexual.

Possible explanaitions: There is an intelligent creator who thinks it is really funny to make people gay to see how they'll react--possible, but highly unlikely an omnipotent being would bother screwing with us mortals that way.

Option 2: Sometimes nature doesn't follow biological imperatives and things mutate. It's the basis of a large sector of comic book superheroes. If mutation isn't another word for "genetic mix-up" I don't know what is, and if the way that people treat homosexuals isn't tragic, I don't know what is.

Or perhaps its nature's way of addressing the problem of over-population (though I personally think thats insulting and over-simplifying the issue far too much). Or maybe homosexuals have always been around (they obviously have been at least as long as recorded history, and most definitly longer). Homosexuality isn't anything new. Only society's views on it and attempts to incorporate it into the "normal" trappings of society are.

I do wish he had addressed the gap between the rights the government protects for heterosexual and homosexual couples. It's tragic and unfair. That said, I don't think he looks down on homosexuals so much as he looks down on homosexuality, the (he admits) small role it plays in the normalization of an anti-marriage culture, and the way that heterosexuals have played in making marriage a largely meaningless term for modern culture.

Homosexuals haven't made (and won't make) marriage meaningless. Heterosexual people who get married, then cheat, get divorced, etc, are the ones responsible for that. Trying to lay blame for society's current blase attitude about marriage at the feet of gay people is retarded.

He's raging against the unconstitutional judicial legislation of an ancient custom that predates the Constitution driven by a philosophical and political viewpoint that undercuts his most fundemental values.

I understand that. However, no one is saying that gay marriage needs to be recognized by religions/churches, etc. Only in the eyes of the state, which courts have EVERY right to determine. As I said, they deserve the same rights through marriage afforded straight couples through the government. This doesn't mean churches, synogogues, or mosques will be court ordered to marry gay people...it means they have a right to apply for a marriage license and get one. THE END.

It's a VERY complicated and multi-faceted viewpoint that deserves to not just be boiled down to "OSC hates gays, lol."

Its really not that complicated in a country based on personal freedoms. In fact, its very simple. If you can give me a reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry, I'm all ears. But so far even OSC hasn't done that.

And whether or not he "hates" gay people is irrelevant. Its obvious, however, that he doesn't believe they deserve the same rights as straight people. Thats discriminatory no matter how you look at it.

Reading this article shows that he recognizes that homosexuals are complicated and real people which deserve to be treated with the respect and seriousness deserving of any human being.

Except being allowed to marry? Which is a right afforded to every other straight human being.

:roll:

Anyway, thanks for giving me the chance to read more of his stuff, and to better understand his viewpoint.

P.S. I'm not trying to start a big flaming controversy here, I just think that his viewpoints are worth a second look.

No problem. I appreciate your discussion on it. Much better to discuss and debate views than not. No better way to learn about the world. Least thats how I look at it.




...On a completely unrelated not, I love your avatar. Used to be into Chaos comics back as a young teen, and for Halloween one year I carved a pumpkin with Smiley's face on it. Turned out awesome (especially with the candle burning inside it). I have to dig out the pictures I took. Anyway, cool avatar.

To put on my Houde Hat, there are actually a lot of valid reasons that I've heard for why homosexuality would exist from an evolutionary standpoint.

The key thing to consider is that evolution isn't just about the survival of individuals, but the species as a whole, meaning that even if a gay person never procreates, they are still contributing to the survival of the species. Population control is one obvious thing that people point to. Another would be the integration of the male and female brains: essentially, in a modern world where one's gender means less and less, having characteristics of both sexes could be beneficial. The theory I like the most is that homosexuality stabilizes communities. The more stable relationships there are in a species, be they between people of opposite sexes or the same sex, the more harmony there will be. If gay couples were allowed to marry in the US, it would probably strengthen marriage, and if they were allowed to adopt, millions of children who would otherwise grow up without parents would have a home.

Very interesting points and very well said.

All this evolutionary nonsense offends me. Everyone knows homosexuality is the logical result of intelligent design.

God is gay?

I'm far from an evolutionary expert, but my understanding of the whole thing is that instinct drives organisms to do anything they can to survive. That's WHY they evolve. I've never heard of a species or organism keeping itself in check - that's what other species are for - and it makes no sense whatsoever given the *definition* of evolution.

Nature may not have a reason, but it most definitely has a purpose.

The problem with that is that humans are at the top of the food chain because of our intelligence and technology. So basically, there isn't any other species keeping us in check at the moment, and hasn't been for a very long time (since we were living in caves, really).

This will hold true until the aliens invade.

 

[Gemini]

Cancer would be my guess for this.

Religon would be mine.

 

[Joe Kalicki]

National Organization for Marriage head Robert George is still insisting that the Mormon Church is not funding NOM, but yesterday another high-profile Mormon, noted sci-fi author Orson Scott Card joined its board of directors.

In a Mormon Times column published last August, Card called for the overthrow of the government over same-sex marriage.

If America becomes a place where our children are taken from us by law and forced to attend schools where they are taught that cohabitation is as good as marriage, that motherhood doesn't require a husband or father, and that homosexuality is as valid a choice as heterosexuality for their future lives, then why in the world should married people continue to accept the authority of such a government? What these dictator-judges do not seem to understand is that their authority extends only as far as people choose to obey them. 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.

 

[ProjectX2]

Despicable.

 

[Ice]

He also "came to me" in the stall for $20 but that's a story for another time.

Nope. No hidden message here.

 

[Taskmaster]

I thought nature's way of addressing population overgrowth was for massive dieoffs once a species maxed out on it's natural resources. So was everything I learned in biology wrong? I am so confused

Anywho, that's beside the point. I for one am glad Card purchased Marvel. I eagerly await the day Ultimate Iron Man becomes the definitive and canonical origin of Iron Man-616. If only Stan Lee had the brilliance to imagine Tony Stark as a giant anthropomorphic brain.

*pukes quietly in corner*

 

[mike3717]

National Organization for Marriage head Robert George is still insisting that the Mormon Church is not funding NOM, but yesterday another high-profile Mormon, noted sci-fi author Orson Scott Card joined its board of directors.

In a Mormon Times column published last August, Card called for the overthrow of the government over same-sex marriage.

If America becomes a place where our children are taken from us by law and forced to attend schools where they are taught that cohabitation is as good as marriage, that motherhood doesn't require a husband or father, and that homosexuality is as valid a choice as heterosexuality for their future lives, then why in the world should married people continue to accept the authority of such a government? What these dictator-judges do not seem to understand is that their authority extends only as far as people choose to obey them. 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.

What a disgrace.

Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb Dumb (one of the best episodes of South Park ever)

 

[Gemini]

I bet OSC is a big Glenn Beck fan.

 

[Foolsfolly]

Yikes.

Why so serious?

 

[Dr.Strangefate]

I love how the "Orson Scott Card buys Marvel" Thread has become the Mormons vs. Gay People thread.

Also: OSC should go ahead and TRY to overthrow the government... Also: Reading that makes me want to strangle people.

 

[Jaggyd]

I love how the "Orson Scott Card buys Marvel" Thread has become the Mormons vs. Gay People thread.

Also: OSC and Glen Beck should go ahead and TRY to overthrow the government... Also: Reading that makes me want to strangle people.

Sorry, had to fix that for you.


Yeah, and pretty much the same feeling crawls over me too.

 

[Planet-man]

I love how the "Orson Scott Card buys Marvel" Thread has become the Mormons vs. Gay People thread.

Beat up Tog! Beat up Tog!

 

[Gemini]

They should all move to Texas and secceed. oh and the Palins too.