Friction at DC

[IndyJones]

Yes, because polls are really capturing the true opinion of half of 300+ million individuals, from the child to the elderly. As Mitt Romney learned somewhere around summer of last year, some polling data is not an accurate measure of real world opinion or action.

Not for nothing, but there's bound to be a large overlap in the type of people who believed the poll skewers that Mitt Romney was actually winning while ignoring many other polls, and people who believe that support for marriage equality isn't growing exponentially. It's the same group of people deluding themselves again.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Card is free to continue to produce his art. He's a writer. He doesn't need anyone to hire him. He can write, anytime, anywhere he wants. Probably most of his money comes from his novels, not the occasional comic he does. So, he's not being stopped from writing. "Oh, but, he's being stopped from making a living." No, he's being stopped from working at DC. He can continue to write and sell his novels.

Reading betwen the lines: "you can write, just don't write where I do not want you to."

Thought and action (employment) control.

I am SURE they think they are trying to make the world a better place. So? What's your point? That you think I'm so closed minded or something?

It is clear that you are, and see any view other than your own as "bigoted" while avoid the reasons why OSC may hold certain beliefs. You cannot see that, so blanket attacks are the easy route.

I don't flee from it. I know I can. I know I have free will to buy another book. Just like I have free will to join a protest. And as far as absolute thought and action control?

Your every reply is an argument in favor of forcing DC to do your bidding--the end result being OSC never working for the company again, based on a view not connected to the publisher at all.

Let's not pretend you are in favor of the fair treatment of OSC that you demand for your position on marriage.

Hey, if you want to come out and say gay men and women shouldn't be allowed to marry, just say it. You don't have to hide it in obfuscation.

I see hyperbole draped in would-be "hot" wording is your little attempt to steer the matter away from your agenda.

Not working, son.

Oh, so you're not going to answer the question about whether or not ack. Nice. Transparent. But... nice tactic.

you are the issue, as you have taken a hostile position, so whether you will ever understand it or not, you have made yourself part of the problem: attempted thought and action control.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Last chance, folks. Let's please return to the topic of the thread and not continue this irrelevant sidebar

Neroon, as the guy who started this thread, I see no harm in discussing this, and it's certainly not irrelevant. The entire issue is whether an artist's perceived or actual political stance should affect the appreciation of his art (and whether in fact they are separable), whether and how the artist should be impacted by the public reaction to his stances, etc.
The whole POINT of art is to spark such conversations. I know we culturally just want pretty pictures and Disney, but how about we actually have a conversation around here? Frankly, you're overstepping. We're all grown-ups here. Grown up enough for this conversation, anyway. "Last chance"? Really?

 

[BillJ]

We should treat those people who practice hate just like everyone else...

Sorry, I'm not buying it.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I "begin" conversations with a friend who really, really cherry picks the religion she believes is utterly real, now and then, which has included commentary like this... "No, no, why do you think I hate homosexuals? Because I'm Christian? No, Christians don't hate gays. What would makes you think that? We love everyone."

The practice of hate (about eventually "something" even decimally) is everywhere Bill, and it takes a lot of denial to deal with a world as if it was pejoratively nothing but rainbows and kittens.

 

[Neroon]

Last chance, folks. Let's please return to the topic of the thread and not continue this irrelevant sidebar

Neroon, as the guy who started this thread, I see no harm in discussing this, and it's certainly not irrelevant. The entire issue is whether an artist's perceived or actual political stance should affect the appreciation of his art (and whether in fact they are separable), whether and how the artist should be impacted by the public reaction to his stances, etc.
The whole POINT of art is to spark such conversations. I know we culturally just want pretty pictures and Disney, but how about we actually have a conversation around here? Frankly, you're overstepping. We're all grown-ups here. Grown up enough for this conversation, anyway. "Last chance"? Really?

Yes, really. There is conversation and discussion, both energetic and even tense. And there is ranting about unrelated topics simply to be arguing or to lead into political diatribes.

Since it seems that folk here are unwilling to keep clear of the latter, I'm closing the thread for now. Comments to PM, or if you want to try the subject again without the extra baggage, that's possible and we can discuss that via PM if you like.