It’s A Bird! It’s A Plane! It’s Super-Homophobe!

Don’t mess with the “S.”

DC Comics announced this week that Orson Scott Card, author of Ender’s Game will be the writer of the Adventures of Superman. Mr. Card is an extremely conservative, extremely controversial choice based upon his strident anti-gay beliefs and opposition to same-sex marriage.

Card explained his views at length in a 2004 essay.

Calling a homosexual contract “marriage” does not make it reproductively relevant and will not make it contribute in any meaningful way to the propagation of civilization.

In fact, it will do harm. Nowhere near as much harm as we have already done through divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing. But it’s another nail in the coffin. Maybe the last nail, precisely because it is the most obvious and outrageous attack on what is left of marriage in America.

Supporters of homosexual “marriage” dismiss warnings like mine as the predictable ranting of people who hate progress. But the Massachusetts Supreme Court has made its decision without even a cursory attempt to ascertain the social costs. The judges have taken it on faith that it will do no harm.

You can’t add a runway to an airport in America without years of carefully researched environmental impact statements. But you can radically reorder the fundamental social unit of society without political process or serious research.

Let me put it another way. The sex life of the people around me is none of my business; the homosexuality of some of my friends and associates has made no barrier between us, and as far as I know, my heterosexuality hasn’t bothered them. That’s what tolerance looks like.

But homosexual “marriage” is an act of intolerance. It is an attempt to eliminate any special preference for marriage in society — to erase the protected status of marriage in the constant balancing act between civilization and individual reproduction.

So if my friends insist on calling what they do “marriage,” they are not turning their relationship into what my wife and I have created, because no court has the power to change what their relationship actually is.

Instead they are attempting to strike a death blow against the well-earned protected status of our, and every other, real marriage.

They steal from me what I treasure most, and gain for themselves nothing at all. They won’t be married. They’ll just be playing dress-up in their parents’ clothes.

Very conservative, very homophobic, very controversial.

That’s pretty harsh as is, but the further you drill down into Card’s essay the deepest it descends into the ugliest of homophobic stereotypes and hetro-paranoia:

Already any child with any kind of sexual attraction to the same sex is told that this is an irresistible destiny, despite the large number of heterosexuals who move through this adolescent phase and never look back.

Already any child with androgynous appearance or mannerisms — effeminite boys and masculine girls — are being nurtured and guided (or taunted and abused) into “accepting” what many of them never suspected they had — a desire to permanently move into homosexual society.

In other words, society will bend all its efforts to seize upon any hint of homosexuality in our young people and encourage it.

Now, there is a myth that homosexuals are “born that way,” and we are pounded with this idea so thoroughly that many people think that somebody, somewhere, must have proved it.

In fact what evidence there is suggests that if there is a genetic component to homosexuality, an entire range of environmental influences are also involved. While there is no scientific research whatsoever that indicates that there is no such thing as a borderline child who could go either way.

Those who claim that there is “no danger” and that homosexuals are born, not made, are simply stating their faith.

The dark secret of homosexual society — the one that dares not speak its name — is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally.

It’s that desire for normality, that discontent with perpetual adolescent sexuality, that is at least partly behind this hunger for homosexual “marriage.”

They are unhappy, but they think it’s because the rest of us “don’t fully accept them.”

Homosexual “marriage” won’t accomplish what they hope. They will still be just as far outside the reproductive cycle of life. And they will have inflicted real damage on those of us who are inside it.

Who needs Metropolis when you've got Gay City?

Who needs Metropolis when you’ve got Gay City?

This is the dude DC Comics thinks would be a great choice to write Superman? I don’t read the comic books any more, but I recall Superman standing for “truth, justice and the American way.” Is overt hatred for a group of people the American way?
Some gay activists don’t think so, but for now DC Comics is standing by the controversial Card.

The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender activist website has collected more than 11,000 signatures on an online petition asking DC to drop Card from the project.

“By hiring Orson Scott Card despite his anti-gay efforts you are giving him a new platform and supporting his hate,” the petition reads. “We need to let DC Comics know they can’t support Orson Scott Card or his work to keep LGBT people as second-class citizens.”

Card and his representatives did not respond to requests Wednesday for a comment.

A statement released Wednesday by DC said: “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.”

The publisher has a history of being pro-LGBT with its series. Batwoman, featuring a strong and nuanced lesbian superheroine who shares the Gotham City streets with Batman, has won two GLAAD Media Awards for outstanding comic book and is up for a third this year.

That’s partly why some comics readers have difficulty understanding the Card hiring.

“When you consider all the writers available in the world, picking one as controversial as Card seems like a clueless, tone-deaf move by DC. On the other hand, they were probably just thinking of the Ender’s Game movie coming out (in November) and getting even more attention,” says Heidi MacDonald, editor in chief of the comics-culture website The Beat.

Other authors such as Brad Metzler, Jodi Picoult, Eric Jerome Dickey and Stephen King have taken their turns writing mainstream comics for DC and Marvel, but Card’s history of demonizing an entire segment of readers makes him a poor choice to write the most iconic character in the history of the comics genre.

DC is kidding themselves if they think their LGBT readers will overlook Card’s odious beliefs and separate them from his writing talents. It isn’t political correctness to punt Card from writing Superman.  In a time when comic books are struggling to hold on to every reader they have, doe it make sense to use a writer who has displayed such contempt for a portion of the audience based upon their sexual orientation.    If Card were railing against Jews or Blacks in blatantly anti-Semitic, racist language DC wouldn’t consider for a moment hiring him.

Superman has played gay such as the time he was exposed to pink Kryptonite and faster than a speeding bullet he was hitting on Jimmy Olsen, ”

The excuse by DC that Card’s  odious “personal views” don’t reflect on the company is crap.    What they’re saying is they tolerate some forms of bigotry  as long as its gays and lesbians being dumped on.

Card is a hate-filled fanatic and DC should drop this guy like a bad habit.    Superman deserves a writer who shares his beliefs.

When Superman went gay, things got…interesting.