So I read this little article in the NY Times that made me want to scream at it. Except that I was at work and that would have looked unprofessional. It was about the Conservatives and Republicans holding up March of the Penguins as a shining example of monogamy and family values. They even went so far as to say that since evolution and global warming were not mentioned much in the movie, that made it even more Conservative-friendly.
They conveniently left out that part about the penguins getting a new mate every season, them living on Antarctica for millions of years (no Intelligent Design here), and that when the moms lose their baby, they tend to try and steal someone else's chick. Family values, indeed.
I fucking hate right wing, religious, Creationism-loving, homosexual-hating idiots who take a movie about a bunch of birds and turn it into this year's Passion of the Christ.
And it was such a fucking cute movie too. Why did they have to try to pull so much stupid meaning out of it?
They conveniently left out that part about the penguins getting a new mate every season, them living on Antarctica for millions of years (no Intelligent Design here), and that when the moms lose their baby, they tend to try and steal someone else's chick. Family values, indeed.
I fucking hate right wing, religious, Creationism-loving, homosexual-hating idiots who take a movie about a bunch of birds and turn it into this year's Passion of the Christ.
And it was such a fucking cute movie too. Why did they have to try to pull so much stupid meaning out of it?
VIEW 8 of 8 COMMENTS
obelisk:
And I especially miss some of the PDX residents. Thanks for e b-day post! 
alyssum:
Why yes, I just got my copy!