I had a similar discussion a few months back with some gay friends about whether Chick-fil-A should be prohibited from opening an outlet in Boston.  It was my contention that the loudly anti-gay owner of the franchise was an a$$hole but denying him business opportunities based on his political or religious beliefs was no better than a gay buisness owner being denied such opportunities based on his sexuality. 

I've read Ender's Game and while it was a good novel I never thought it was one of the best ever written.  I prefer Card's Alvin Maker series, a fantasy set on the American frontier.  All my books, including those written by Card, are packed away in storage as I presently have no where else to store them and I miss them terribly.  If I had them available I would not forgo reading them because of what I now know about Card's beliefs/politics.  What would be the point?  I bought them long ago so my money is already in Card's pocket and he will never know (or likely care) if I ever read them again.

As for Superman, I'm with Liquids and Kaz.  I don't read the Superman comic at present.  I'm not going to pick up a copy to see what the fuss is about.  But if I did habitualy read it I would not boycott it due to Card's involvement.  Card is entitled to seek what employment he chooses and DC is entitled to hire any writers they want to.  As long as the subject of the comics isn't anti-gay it shouldn't matter to anybody what Card does or doesn't think about that subject.  If the comics DO have an anti-gay slant to them then Card and DC still have a right to tell that story if they want to.

And anybody with an opinion about it has the right to peacefully express that opinion or to boycott Superman or DC in general or do whatever they want about it.

 I agree that Card's private views wouldn't affect whether I'd buy these, unless of course he's soapboxing them. Having weird views or doing dumb, even illegal things doesn't change the quality of one's work.
Which makes this article interesting in light of the fact that there is at least one contributor here who constantly goes on about not only what a pariah Mel Gibson is and should be but has retconned all his work (even the stuff that won Oscars) to the level of offensive trash.

 I think I'll go buy Superman now.

I just love the hypocrisy of intolerance by the self proclaimed "tolerant." No one's entitled to an opinion unless it falls in line with the bolshevik left. The man's entitled to his opinion, deal with it!

I think people that criticize a successful businessman that has welcomed homeless children into his home, fostered children for much of his adult life, focused on the welfare of needy children and has donated 10s of millions of dollars to worthwhile causes are a$$holes.

I think it was summed up pretty well in the article, he has a right to write and voice his views wherever he wants and how he wants. I would assume it would be stupid of DC to allow him to start sending his hate and wrong message into a comic character, especially as hight and important as Superman.

But in the end I would prefer to send a message to DC and boycott the book itself...if I was reading Superman. since all of DC's book for me have no interest for me at this point it wouldn't affect me.

But if this was happening with Marvel, I'd be really disapointed and would boycott the book.

Just because someone spreads hate in some forms of communication but may not in others (which again, he does have the right), doesn't make it ok to support him in buying his books that may have nothing with his opinion.

But that's my choice. I like the comparison Karas1 one gave earlier, that chicken place that takes their own right and decision with a specific mentility as a busines and it's based on what they believe, that's ok. People still have the choice not to eat there if they don't want to and as a business you can't stop them from being in business.

Expression has many forms, and when someone sends a specific opinion, it's understandable there will be difference of opinion.

I support gays and would never support someone who spreads hate in any form.

DC Comics has 52 titles running, so the odds are that some of them already have writers whose views are not politically correct.  They just have enough sense to keep their archaic notions towards sex, race, religion, or whatever to themselves.  Card has announced loudly and proudly that he is a bigoted old dinosaur.  Refusing to hire someone on the basis of their anti-gay beliefs is just as wrong as refusing to employ someone who is openly gay.  Once you start refusing to hire someone based on their politics, you are restricting their civil rights.  As long as ones personal beliefs are not having an adverse affect upon their work, it shouldn't matter.  People have the right to be bigots.  People have the right to criticize bigots for their outdated ideas.  That's free speech, folks.  It works both ways. 

In a way, I welcome the vitriol of people like Card.  Their aggressive reaction to the changing state of affairs in regard to racism, sexism, etc. is a reflection of the fact that they are in a rapidly shrinking minority.  They feel compelled to rant and rave ever more loudly to make up for their lack of numbers.  Every day, more of their ilk die of old age while each new generation is far more open minded than the one before it.  That's why these people filled with hate insist that the acceptance of the ideas they despise will be the end of the world, because they'd rather see the world end than for their notion of "how things ought to be" to be left on the ash heap of history.

A few comments-

Thanks to everyone who as commented, that was tho whole point of the article- to see what the Maniacs had to say.

@fennig The comment service can be a real pain, there are many odd things that can get a comment to either disappear or never show up, sorry man!

I would have to disagree- my putting Ender's Game in my attic is nothing like the outcry over the Beatles or Dixie Chicks. I didn't burn the book, and I have never, or will ever, vocally tell someone they shouldn't rad it. It's a fantastic book! The difference here is Card hasn't just made a few off the cuff remarks (like the Beatles did), he is part of an oranization (NOM) that puts forth some disturbing views that hare pretty darn hateful and demeaning. It's enough that it has made me dislike Card and I hav chose to not support his work. I don't hate the man, but my internal "moral meter" has gone overboard when it comes to him, so I made a personal choice. Phil Spector is completely insane, and even murdered someone, but that doesn't stop me from loving the music he's produced. He doesn't tip the scales of my moral meter, because his issues come from a completely different place. Again, this is all personal choice.

 "Unless the storylines become propaganda for his beliefs, I wouldn't automatically start a boycott."  

 One of the websites I read regularly has one of the top people in the National Organization for Marriage as one of its contributors, so I'm familiar with her writing on the subject a bit, and it really is unfair for you cite Card's involvement with them as proof of his being anti-gay.  They're opposed to same-sex marriage, but being opposed to same-sex marriage doesn't automatically make one anti-gay.  I know of homosexuals who oppose same-sex marriage for a variety of reasons (some are conservatives who think you shouldn't mess around with age-old institutions, and some are radicals who think supporting marriage is caving into heterosexist norms), and they don't strike me as particularly self-loathing.