Orson Scott Card is so in the closet

[gray_ghost]

Have to share these two links posted on monkeygroup awhile back.

Read The Hypocrites of Homosexuality An essay Card wrote in 1990.

And this interview he did for Salon in 2000. LOL....the interviewer is a militant Jewish lesbian . Ummmm.....wooops.

I cannot believe this guy wrote a novel as cool and amazing as Ender's Game. I'm glad I read it before I found out some of his other views.

Oh - btw. Are there any Mormons or jack-Mormons on my flist? If you are, please check out the following quote from the first link:


We Latter-day Saints know that we are eternal beings who must gain control of our bodies and direct our lives toward the good of others in order to be worthy of an adult role in the hereafter. So the regulation of sexual drives is designated not just to preserve the community of the Saints but also to improve and educate the individuals within it. The Lord asks no more of its members who are tempted toward homosexuality than it does of its unmarried adolescents, its widows and widowers, its divorced members, and its members who never marry. Furthermore, the Lord even guides the sexual behavior of those who are married, expecting them to use their sexual powers responsibly and in a proportionate role within the marriage.

Just out of curiosity - what guidelines does the Lord prescribe for married Mormons and the use of their 'sexual powers?' Is there a list of approved positions?

Comments

[phendog.livejournal.com]

Um, I can't really outline the whole list of Mormon sexual practices, not being a member of the LDS, but "my Mormon stalker ex-boyfriend"(TM) forced me to come with him to some of their services, and they usually have an hour of "family discussion."

I'd guess there are "rules" although probably informal ones. They're encouraged not to be wonton or excessive, and the wife is always to submit to the husband.

So...um, no topping femmes with whips and chains, I'm thinking ;^)

[phendog.livejournal.com]

Oh...actually, I hope elizabuffy answers your question. She'd know better than I probably. She was a Mormon under protest for a short while.

In fact, I don't think they ever officially ex-communicated her...she was too lazy to officially denounce them ;^)

Sorry for my really long, rambling thoughts, but it was an interesting topic...

[phendog.livejournal.com]

Wow, that was really educational. Hmm...I didn't know that either, considering that was one of the things that bothered me as a kid...I almost thought there were TOO many potentially homosexual entendres in some of his books (particularly the Homecoming series) -- I was an exceptionally prudish child, believe it or not. Though...knowing his background, it doesn't surprise me. Sadly, I've heard very similar views often before from other members of the LDS church...and elsewhere.

Wow...that interview did turn hostile fast! I have to say, the interviewer was being a tad biased in her own perception of it (though as it's an honest opinion from her viewpoint, I see nothing wrong with that), but some of the things he says kinda pissed me off too. Ugh...reading his own essay is a terrible experience in justification.

I know both sides of an issue do it...leap to justify, making claims that aren't supportable and are primarily opinion based and simply self-righteous, but still...

Ignoring his comments on the military, his views on homosexuality are disturbing--that it's basically an immature, childish lifestyle that is ultimately unfulfilling--are disturbing. As are the view that one should deny it even if predispositioned. Acting out on homosexuality isn't exactly like acting on the desire to kill one's acquantainces, after all.

The goal is to discourage people from engaging in homosexual practices in the first place, and, when they nevertheless proceed in their homosexual behavior, to encourage them to do so discreetly, so as not to shake the confidence of the community in the polity's ability to provide rules for safe, stable, dependable marriage and family relationships.

I love that last bit. Okay, so not only should they deny it, but they should allow us to deny it. I hate the "shove it back in the closet" attitude. Seriously. Pretending something doesn't exist and isn't going on is the true childishness. Because he says it's important not to shake the "confidence of the community" it's almost as if he's treating the community as the child which needs protection from the realities of the outside world. Kinda reminds me of The Giver, actually...

I predicted toward the beginning of the preceding essay that those who have already accepted the dogmas of the homosexual community as a source of truth superior to the words of the prophets would be incapable of reading what I had actually written here and would instead interpret my words as intolerance, oppression, gay-bashing, or, an epithet used now without a shred of its original meaning, "homophobia." My prediction was exactly fulfilled

So basically...what Card is saying is that disagreement with him is just due to closed mindedness or brainwashing? Well that's a nice way to say "I'm always right."

I do find myself wanting to find a copy of Songmaster to read, though. I may just have to do that...

I also find myself wanting to suddenly write Ender/Bean slash...*evil grin*

My turn to chime in!

[elizabuffy.livejournal.com]

Yes, I was forced in the LDS church (don't ask) for a while.

Let me make it perfectly clear that Mormons are just like members of everyone else. You will get a completely different response from everyone you ask. It is unfair to clump something someone says in the name of the church to speak for all the members of the church. There is also church docterine and beliefs of individuals. They vary wildly. The official church rule is very conservative, but erring on politically correct: it won't due to piss off the universe, would it? That being said, on to the stereotypes :)

What Card says in his paper is very similar to official church docterine. The church is very much of the philosophy that it's okay to "be gay," just not "act gay." All members of the church are held under the same values. Homosexuality is a sin because two members of the opposite sex cannot be married, and therefore that breaks the "no sex before marriage" commandment. If you really want to make a mormon's head spin, ask them if that means that homosexual couples who get married are therefore not sinning (civil unions and non-church marriages are seen a legitimate in the church's eyes...if it's f/m). The answer, is obviously "no," but it's fun to back them into a corner. :)

Card's paper is what I imagine would be the church's official stance, if not for politics. Arrest all the fags, lock them out of the work place, put them in concentration camps, gas them...but i digress...

I, too, read this and thought "someone's afraid of his own homosexuality!" I do feel sorry for him, if this is the case. Afterall, he's been brought up thinking that his natural inclinations are "wrong," and that he's a dirty person. This would certainly explain his anger!

As for the interview. She is a stronger person than I. The main reason I couldn't bring myself to read Ender's Game (even tho' I have the book) was because of Card's personal views. It is so hard for me to read somthing by an author who views are so entirely at war with mine. It colours my whole experience.

To address you question about married "sexual powers." Again, no one mormon is the same, and everyone has different views. Official church stance is that sex is a beautiful love-act (or some such nonsense) to creat children. Like the catholic church, officially, the church is against anything that prevents pregnancy. Obviously, not all mormons feel this way, just as not all mormons feel homosexuals should be outcast from the church.

~e!