In an essay for the Mormon Times (a must-read in my house if ever there was one), Card writes about every facet of what he sees as the homosexual lifestyle. The main point he returns to time and time again is how marriage is only between a man and a woman for the sake of procreation and since same sex unions cannot provide this outcome, they are unnatural and should also be illegal.

But before we get into that whole quagmire, in the spirit of fairness and to show that I'm not blinded by this man's hate, not all of what he says is unadulterated hate. Amidst his fairly long tirade on just what marriage is and its place in the universe, Card says the following:

In an era when birth control and abortion make childbearing completely optional, the number of out-of-wedlock births shows the contempt that many women have for marriage.

Yet most of these single mothers still demand that the man they chose not to marry before having sex with him provide financial support for them and their children -- while denying the man any of the rights and protections of marriage.

While I'm not sure would use the word "contempt" there, there is something to be said for his second point here. If a woman gives birth to a child but specifically does not want to marry the father of said child then why should she expect compensation? This does not apply to deadbeat dads in anyway, simply the situations in which the man seeks a relationship with the woman and is rebuked only to be handed a court order to pay. And of course it's never that cut and dry, but it's a point for discussion.

Have I proven my lack of bias yet? Good, because then he completely backtracks and paints himself as so old fashioned as to make us assume he still makes his own candles and reads hand written pamphlets by lantern light.

Faithful sexual monogamy, persistence until death, male protection and providence for wife and children, female loyalty to children and husband, and parental discretion in child-rearing.

I suppose Card is unaware that women can actually hold a job now. And not during war time, either. Scandal!

And yet for all of his calls for loyalty and justice, Card comes dangerously close to being held up on treason charges. Here are some snippets from his essay in the Mormon Times.

If government is going to meddle in this, it had better be to support marriage in general while providing protection for those caught in truly destructive marriages.

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.

Married people attempting to raise children with the hope that they, in turn, will be reproductively successful, have every reason to oppose the normalization of homosexual unions.

And here, folks, is the kicker. The final paragraphs his essay in total and unedited.

Why should married people feel the slightest loyalty to a government or society that are conspiring to encourage reproductive and/or marital dysfunction in their children?

Why should married people tolerate the interference of such a government or society in their family life?

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.

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.

Forget dangersouly close, Card flat out states that if his views do not become the law of the land then there should be an open rebellion and the American government should be forcibly removed from power. Exactly how big does one's ego have to be to legitimately believe that their beliefs trump the laws that mandate the last remaining superpower in the world and one of the defining achievements in human history?

Now I am hardly a Toby Kieth-listening, flag waving America cheerleader. I'm fully ready admit the country's faults and where it needs help, but I'm also willing to support everything it does right and it's why I live here and did not move to another country when I turned 18. Last I checked the country was doing more right than wrong and while it needs to be nudged in the right direction from time to time, it tends to get there in the end.

Apparently Card would believe it's being nudged in the wrong direction. You would think it's obvious there is a reason that every long lasting society continually drifts to the left over time. Those that don't remain an ardently controlled dictatorship whose policy is suppression of rights and freedom. Look at Western Europe and how they've actually surpassed America in the race to the left and then look at their quality of life. It's improved overall as they get further and further from the right.

(Now I'm not playing the political card against certain parties. I'm not saying anything about the American Republicans or any other country's specific affiliation. These are broad strokes to one end of the political spectrum or the other.)

If you're not already on the phone with your local Congressman or local headquarters for the Department of Homeland Security, I'll understand. Orson Scott Card is not exactly a major threat to the United States of America or free democracies across the globe, despite what his rants may imply.

He is however, a fair threat to the freedom of being able to love and marry whomever you wish. Because he continuously given work from major media outlets such as Warner Bros. and Marvel, his words are given a larger and larger soapbox every time he opines on his bigotry. Since he has every right to espouse his beliefs and hatred (you know, since this Godless and evil country allows for freedom of speech), the only recouse we have is to simply not listen to him.

Don't buy his books, don't see the movies based on the works, don't pay him attention in any way. The moment we stop paying to listen to the man, the companies supporting him will drop him like a ton of bricks. Make your voice just as loud as his - louder even. Don't support the man and his pulpit will shrivel and die and then he can rant and rave at the next meeting of the Bigot Brigade.