So here it is, though it will be hard for us to read: Card's Litany of Hate.

From a 1990 Essay:

This applies also to the polity, the citizens at large. Laws against homosexual behavior should remain on the books, not to be indiscriminately enforced against anyone who happens to be caught violating them, but to be used when necessary to send a clear message that those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society.

From a 2004 Essay:

Regardless of their opinion of homosexual "marriage," every American who believes in democracy should be outraged that any court should take it upon itself to dictate such a social innovation without recourse to democratic process. And we all know the course this thing will follow. Anyone who opposes this edict will be branded a bigot; any schoolchild who questions the legitimacy of homosexual marriage will be expelled for "hate speech." The fanatical Left will insist that anyone who upholds the fundamental meaning that marriage has always had, everywhere, until this generation, is a "homophobe" and therefore mentally ill. Which is the modern Jacobin equivalent of crying, "Off with their heads!"

So the people advocating for equal rights, according to OSC, want to murder anyone who opposes them.

Any homosexual man who can persuade a woman to take him as her husband can avail himself of all the rights of husbandhood under the law. And, in fact, many homosexual men have done precisely that, without any legal prejudice at all. Ditto with lesbian women. Many have married men and borne children. And while a fair number of such marriages in recent years have ended in divorce, there are many that have not.



So it is a flat lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage. To get those civil rights, all homosexuals have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage. In order to claim that they are deprived, you have to change the meaning of "marriage" to include a relationship that it has never included before this generation, anywhere on earth.

From a 2008 Essay:

Because when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary. . . . 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. Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.

So if Gay Marriage is legalized, he will advocate for the violent destruction of the United States. This despite the fact that he calls anyone who advocates for equality a Jacobin murderer.

This man is now the Mormon Church's representative to the National Organization for Marriage, the people behind the "A Storm is Coming, and I am Afraid" video.

He is using the money from his books to advocate for the destruction of the American government if the rights of gays and lesbians are protected.

This breaks my heart. Normally, if I was confronted by a right wing republican who said such things, I would be able to say "Wow, he's crazy," and move on. But this man was an important figure in my childhood.

This is the man who inspired me to write. This is the reason I am writing now. The things he wrote helped shape my world view. To discover that this man I have looked up to since I was twelve has used my adoration to advocate horrific violations of human rights is beyond tragedy.

I know that I am being far too charitable to Card when I say this, but I hope that when we are victorious, which we inevitably will be, that history remembers this man more for his wonderful books, than for his bigotry and hatred; for the ideas of love that he professed though he failed to practice them.

I will never purchase another one of his books so long as he is alive, or so long as he or his estate choose to use the proceeds from his work to encourage theocratic oppression, and the criminalization of gays and lesbians.

Though it absolutely breaks my heart, I encourage you to do the same.

[Update] In addition to new books by Orson Scott Card, there is a video game from which he will receive royalties called Shadow Complex. Though most of the creators are decent people, I also urge the boycott of Shadow Complex because the royalties from it will aid card in his bigoted crusade.

Please don't use this diary to start a witch hunt. There's a difference between the writer who says something abhorrent, and the writer who becomes a political activist for something abhorrent. In his classes, his speeches, and his activities, Card is attacking civil liberties. If you give him your money, he will be better enabled to do so. Don't burn his books, and don't demand that they be taken off library shelves. Just don't buy them, and encourage others not to.