http://www.i-mockery.com/comics/longbox7/

“Supporting the work” doesn’t have to be providing direct financial benefit to his cause, though.

If you’re a poor human being I don’t need a list to tell me to avoid your product.

But — and this is a big but — you can accept the art without supporting or promoting the artist. If you hold certain beliefs you have a responsibility to spend your money in a way that doesn’t support things you find execrable. If you like Ender’s Game, fine (although I think you have terrible taste), but at the point you realise that money you pay for Card’s books is going to finance a hate group, you need to stop paying. And if you want to be able to buy the next Superman comic, you need to send a message to DC that says “I will not give you my money if you make this choice”.

I’m lucky that I hate Card’s work as much as I hate his politics, so there’s no dissonance for me here. I’m even luckier that Lovecraft is dead, because there’s no way he’d be getting dollar one from me no matter how much I loved “The Colour Out Of Space”.

This has caused people to rethink how they view his work, and to question his intentions when considering the meaning of his work. Are they wrong to do so?

Admittedly there are a couple of differences here. For one thing, as far as I know, Krafft’s work doesn’t directly state his beliefs the way Card has put anti-gay statements in the mouths of some of his characters. Also, although Krafft has spoken on a white supremacist podcast, he’s not publicly sitting on the board of any racist or anti-Semitic organization, and, when questioned by reporters he knows will probably disagree with his views, he’s shown an unwillingness to share them.

So the major difference is that Card is a lot more public and a lot more vocal about his prejudices, and we know he financially supports efforts to take away the rights of others. But, still, knowing what I’ve just told you about Krafft, would you still be willing to defend him by saying, “I don’t believe the Holocaust is a myth, but…”? Would you still say his work should be judged solely on its own merits, and, if so, what standards would you use for determining those merits?

There is a pretty good (but long) article written a while ago about Ender’s problematic morality.  Worth chewing on when you think about the lessons of Ender’s Game.   http://www4.ncsu.edu/~tenshi/Killer_000.htm

Although I do think art should be judged on its own merit, art doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The artist’s views influences the art, so knowing about the artist means we can get a better understanding of the art, too. (Or at least for me it helps when a writer suddenly goes into a rant about something… Heinlein ranting about woman’s place, or Hoyle’s digs about the Big Bang)

Nobody is without their faults, I usually try to view the art as is, although with the understanding of who and where the author is coming from. (So, when I read Podkayne of Mars, I better understand _why_ the rant is included in the book when I understand that the writer is a well known misogynist.) I can appreciate Ender’s Game as a book, but that doesn’t mean that I have to support the writer or his view.

But I’m not judging Card’s work here, I haven’t seen it, I can’t say if it’s a good comic or not.  I’m refusing to support it.  The way that Leni Riefenstahl made some bold, dramatic DP choices in Triumph of the Will but that thing is never going to grace my shelf.
Card isn’t going to go broke without my dollars and neither is NOM, but I’m sure going to sleep a hell of a lot better knowing that they didn’t get any support from me.

I am all for gay rights and equality across the board.

No, no you’re not.  I can’t decide whether to tell you to look up accurate definitions of “all”, “for”, “equality” or “rights”.

If you provide financial support to someone who is a political lobbyist against gay rights, you are a shitty ally. You go beyond naive to willful ignorance.

Someone can do horrible things, but they deserve no support and monetary entitlements.

And you were eaten alive, but I suppose you’re going to repeat yourself without addressing previous criticism.