Originally Posted by HarryT
I'm another one for the viewpoint that an author is free to hold whatever personal views they wish; I don't go in for the idea of "thought crime". I may vehemently disagree with their views, but I absolutely defend their right to hold them.
I'll judge an author solely on the quality of their books.
These are two very different statements.
I tend to agree that an author should be judged, as an author, on his books.
I also agree that authors, as any human beings, are allowed to hold any opinion they want to. So am I, and if I think someone's opinions are stupid and morally wrong, I also have a right to voice that opinion, just as he has a right to voice his.
I've never read any of OSC's books, so I don't have an opinion on that. I agree that he has a right to his own opinions on sex. I also have a right to consider him a prick, if indeed he is "vehemently homophobic". I certainly don't think his books should be banned and I may even read one of them some day, but I still have a right to my opinions about his opinions.