Read up on the history of abortion in America, too, if you really want your eyes opened.

A man's responsibility to his child, unborn or not, supercedes his relationship with the mother, but the ultimate responsibility to give birth to the child is a god-given genetic right of the mother. As a woman, she's the only way life enters the world, whereas with men we provide fertilizer to initiate a genetic sequence. Her life, every part of her, every emotional facet, will be locked into the birth of the child. And so much more. Unable to understand this bond, men should not presume to interfere. If you've had the sex and you didn't work to prevent the pregnancy, it's out of a man's hands. He can leave the woman, but he must provide financially for the child. There should never be an instant where a man is forced by law to support his child, if the woman chooses to have it. If she's heinous, then you shouldn't have had sex with a heinous human being.

I think leaving the choice to women in investing a large portion of their lives to birthing and raising children is definitive. The world's too chock full of idiots and evil and someone has to check that; better it be the vessel through which life flows than some aging religious fanatic or PC touchy feely social worker. We're being overrun with human beings and still people want to save every unwanted child, to give them a chance, to provide the world with the next Bach or Van Gogh.

I'm here to tell you, personally, I believe we've probably seen the last Bachs and Van Goghs. So I wouldn't worry much about the child born to some chicken-fry who's life is over before it can even begin. Better not to exist than to exist to remind us how cruel the world is that these unborn children never had a chance to begin with.

I woke up this morning thinking about this thread. Not being a fan of current comics, (out of the loop for many years), I'm very bothered and disgusted that the so-called fan community has said such cruel things about Byrne over the years. I'm really at a loss, To me JB is a man of strong opinions, and an artist who is fiercely passionate about the artform he has dedicated his life to. But nothing more, as in, nothing negative. Even when I stumbled upon his various columns here and there thru the years I simply thought, "this is a man of strongly held convictions." These allegations of racism, etc. are beyond me. I just don't see it. I have two conclusions:

There are a lot of mean-spirited, small-minded bastards out there who like to piss all over legitimate artists. Perhaps, as mentioned before, it stems from jealously. Who cares. Regardless, I've seen it happen to all kinds of artists who have integrity and care deeply for the work they produce. I've seen it happen many times to artists I admire: Bono of U2, Bruce Springsteen, and, unfortunately, John Byrne, to name just a few.

 I pay these nay-saying bastards no mind, or at least, I try, Still, this kind of venom gets under my skin. I feel for the artists who have to be subjected to this kind of idiotic vitriol. They deserve better, but this world is filled with assholes, and now, with the Internet, they have an even larger voice.

Secondly, there has been a great loss of critical thinking in this country. Objective thinking has all but disappeared. So many "fans" and critics seem to be just reactionaries, flying by the seat of their pants, launching their ill-considered opinions without any regard to accuracy or truth or the feelings of the artists they so unfairly malign. It's a damned shame.

As JB has said, the body of work is there, the evidence is there. Damn the haters, their words hold no water with me. I have marginalized them, or ignored them entirely. I know I cannot change their minds, and I won't even try. I hope Mr. Byrne will carry on regardless, head held high. They are many of us out here who know the truth. And, I, for one, will champion this man's work, even though the work really speaks for itself.

Excuse the rant. As I said, I woke up thinking about this, and had to get it off my chest. Thanks.

I have yet to form a concrete opinion about Mr Byrne.  I'll admit to first coming here from a thread on another forum that was about his apparent dislike for Alan Moore.

So far the only time I've seen him post something that I thought was a bit out of line was calling someone an asshole just for saying they ordered Lost Girls, but that's already been discussed in this thread.

The only things that I have come to notice are that he seems to dislike most of Alan Moore's work, but does not comment on the man himself.  He even refrains from lambasting the person when arguing against Lost Girls, just sticking to his dislike for what he knows of that piece of work.  Which seems to be more than people on other forums have managed.

Finally, he could be a racist, a wife beater, a dog kicker, dictator of an impoverished African nation, but that doesn't change the quality of his work.  And to be honest, as long as his work is up to scratch, does it matter what kind of man he is? 

I'm going to make a point here that could be considered contorversial:  Think in terms of Gary Glitter.  Yes, he's a paedophile and a creep, but My Gang is still a stonking good song.  What you have since found out about the singer doesn't change that.  (I am NOT comparing Mr Byrne to that piece of filth, but merely that what type of person the artist is does not have to change how you view the art).

QUOTE: Actually Dave was quite upset, bringing up the matter again a day later. I don't blame him. On the other hand, I don't read pedophile comic books.

What are you talking about, Joe? Where did I bring it up again? Where was I "upset"?

Chad Carter:  I'm here to tell you, personally, I believe we've probably seen the last Bachs and Van Goghs. So I wouldn't worry much about the child born to some chicken-fry who's life is over before it can even begin. Better not to exist than to exist to remind us how cruel the world is that these unborn children never had a chance to begin with.

What's a "chicken-fry"?  Is that a reference to people who work in the fast food industry?  Or some kind of diagonal reference to the old "black people like fried chicken" chestnut?  I don't get it.

You honestly believe that the human race has seen its last genius?  Its last visionary?  That's pretty sad.  Stop watching reality TV and look around once in a while.  Are you acquainted with no talented or gifted people? 

I'm here to tell you, personally, that you posted some severely idiotic ideas, there.

(And before anyone asks, I am ardently pro-choice.)

So we are back on this again?

Oy.

For my own part, I'm not interested in continuing to debate LOST GIRLS until I've read it. I know the school that says it's inherently damnable; I disagree, for all the reasons I posted in the previous LOST GIRLS thread:

http://tinyurl.com/od8df (the relevant post being about 2/3rds down the page)

Beyond that, I'd like to have read the thing before I throw away more hours of my life discussing it. All I'm seeing are folks repeating their objection, and that seems like a waste of time.

A lot of these guys love the attention basically. Whether it's John Byrne or Peter David or any creator, they love the acknowledgement. Twenty years ago, no one would print their letters and certainly wouldn't respond to them, but the Internet makes it easier for people to puff up their chests at the local comic book shop and say, "I gave what for to (Insert Creator Here)." And the fact that they're banned from the site makes them even happier. They've been recognized, validated. Take it to another level: What has more impact for someone with no life? "I'm not going to see the new Bruce Willis movie because it's not really my thing" or "I'm not going to see the new Bruce Willis movie because he's a jerk. He personally insulted me and I know for a fact he's a sexist."

I think it's great that the Internet allows this degree of interaction with creators. However, if it ever gets to the point that you can't enjoy someone's work because of their personality or some presumed offense, then you need to step back. You're making a big mistake.

I heard someone say they weren't going to buy any more books by a certain creator because of the political beliefs he expressed on his board. I pointed out that this creator probably still held those beliefs back when this person was reading and enjoying his work. I said, "If Jack Kirby or Stan Lee or Steve Ditko had message boards, they would inevitably say something to piss someone off unless it was all so perfectly PR polished as to not really be that authentic anyway. Would you really give up great comics because of this?" This guy didn't really have  a response to that.