NationStates Jolt Archive

Yeah, according to fox news, the new movie Happy Feet contains gay messages, including a baby penguin saying "You'll just have to accept me for who I am"

How homophobic do you have to be to have a penguin gaydar?
-Lewis Black

Yeah, according to fox news, the new movie Happy Feet contains gay messages, including a baby penguin saying "You'll just have to accept me for who I am"

How homophobic do you have to be to have a penguin gaydar?
-Lewis Black

At Thanksgiving, I overheard my sister-in-law saying that the movie definitely contained "political messages." I didn't stop to ask what those might have been. I figured global warming was one, given the movie is set in the Antarctic.

I'm more worried about children swimming in artic waters and thinking animals talk myself

Penguins, like gay men, are sharp dressers.

Tuxedos, you know.

Fred Astaire wore a tuxedo in many of his films, and he also had happy feet.

Fred Astaire movies must, therefore, cause people to be gay.

According to the latest copy of The Agenda, we're systematically gaying every cute animal on the planet. Penguins are not our first conquest! Soon all of the animal kingdom will be gay!

Why? I don't know.

I though this was gonna be about that book with gay penguins in it :(

Apparently one of those penguins went and got with a woman penguin. So there are bi penguins too.

Penguins, like gay men, are sharp dressers.

Tuxedos, you know.

Fred Astaire wore a tuxedo in many of his films, and he also had happy feet.

Fred Astaire movies must, therefore, cause people to be gay.


Hehe also they make excelent fathers.

According to the latest copy of The Agenda, we're systematically gaying every cute animal on the planet. Penguins are not our first conquest! Soon all of the animal kingdom will be gay!

Why? I don't know.

Hey! You aren't supposed to say things like that where Straight People can hear them! :eek:

Gee, I thought the movie came from two ideas:

1. The incredibly boring "March of the Penguins" and
2. Those funny penguins in the movie "Madagascar" who were better than the supposed stars.

I bet some studio people thought up Happy Feet, and said, "yeah, we need some manic people like Robin Williams to do voice overs..."

I don't think they thought it out any more than that...

At Thanksgiving, I overheard my sister-in-law saying that the movie definitely contained "political messages." I didn't stop to ask what those might have been. I figured global warming was one, given the movie is set in the Antarctic.
Oh my fucking God.

I haven't seen it, but from the reviews I've read, yes, of course it contains messages - the main one being that you can be different from anyone else but still be a worthy human being (or, well, penguin).

If that's what consitutes a "political" or even "pro-gay" message these days instead of simply a human and humane one, we're truly in a bad shape as a society.

Sheesh.

(not directed at you, Farnhamia! Just a general rant. ;) )

Gee, I thought the movie came from two ideas:

1. The incredibly boring "March of the Penguins" and
2. Those funny penguins in the movie "Madagascar" who were better than the supposed stars.

I bet some studio people thought up Happy Feet, and said, "yeah, we need some manic people like Robin Williams to do voice overs..."

I don't think they thought it out any more than that...

AH, but that's where you're wrong, Eve. Hollywood has a huge secret research and development program, employing thousands of writers and artists and actors, etc., devoted to transforming the God-fearing Christian nation of America into an atheistic, secular humanist, socialist, multicultural wasteland. They start with the young (think of the children!) and indoctrinate them slowly with cute, gay animals. And this goes back decades. Look at Bambi, a movie that did more to damage the image of hunting and hunters in the US than anything. I could go on, but I think someone's listening in ...

WYTYG: ;)

If I heard the Daily Show correctly, the penguins not finding enough fish was an issue, so maybe its a statement against overfishing.

AH, but that's where you're wrong, Eve. Hollywood has a huge secret research and development program, employing thousands of writers and artists and actors, etc., devoted to transforming the God-fearing Christian nation of America into an atheistic, secular humanist, socialist, multicultural wasteland. They start with the young (think of the children!) and indoctrinate them slowly with cute, gay animals. And this goes back decades. Look at Bambi, a movie that did more to damage the image of hunting and hunters in the US than anything. I could go on, but I think someone's listening in ...

Speaking as a God-fearing Christian, I think that Hollywood is motivated by money alone, and will make any movie that some idiots in a conference room think will make money - and often they're wrong. They don't put any more thought into a movie (and most actors don't put any more effort into acting) than I do when eating a cheeseburger.

They couldn't indoctrinate Michael Jackson to wipe his own ass, let alone the rest of America to follow some ubersecret agenda...

Happy Feet sucked! Not only that I watched it with next to a teacher of my former school (really, the place I got assigned to was next to the bald dragon), there were also things which really annoyed me about it. for example that Mumble never grows up in his appearance...

Speaking as a God-fearing Christian, I think that Hollywood is motivated by money alone, and will make any movie that some idiots in a conference room think will make money - and often they're wrong. They don't put any more thought into a movie (and most actors don't put any more effort into acting) than I do when eating a cheeseburger.

They couldn't indoctrinate Michael Jackson to wipe his own ass, let alone the rest of America to follow some ubersecret agenda...

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Facetious

I knew it!

I saw it the second day it was in theatres, and I knew damn well that there would be some American conservative coming out saying how Happy Feet promotes the homosexual agenda.

AH, but that's where you're wrong, Eve. Hollywood has a huge secret research and development program, employing thousands of writers and artists and actors, etc., devoted to transforming the God-fearing Christian nation of America into an atheistic, secular humanist, socialist, multicultural wasteland. They start with the young (think of the children!) and indoctrinate them slowly with cute, gay animals. And this goes back decades. Look at Bambi, a movie that did more to damage the image of hunting and hunters in the US than anything. I could go on, but I think someone's listening in ...

WYTYG: ;)

Oh, no! Who's leaking a copy of The Agenda? We must skip to plan B everyone!

Its title contains the word "happy", which is a synonym of "gay" and thus a sign of the secret homosexual agenda being pressed to drive our children to acts of immorality and sodomy! How much more proof do you need?! I say we ban it from theaters immediately!!!! Actually, let's ban theaters altogether, because we can construe pretty much anything as having a homosexual agenda! We should all go back to the Puritan lifestyle of our ancestors and forbid anything fun, because fun is SINFUL!

AH, but that's where you're wrong, Eve. Hollywood has a huge secret research and development program, employing thousands of writers and artists and actors, etc., devoted to transforming the God-fearing Christian nation of America into an atheistic, secular humanist, socialist, multicultural wasteland. They start with the young (think of the children!) and indoctrinate them slowly with cute, gay animals. And this goes back decades. Look at Bambi, a movie that did more to damage the image of hunting and hunters in the US than anything. I could go on, but I think someone's listening in ...

WYTYG: ;)

Oi Oi don't knock Bambi mate!

Great film i like the bit when the mother dies. Coz it always gets people saying ohhh that was so sad, don't you think is was soooo sad when Bambi's mother died?

I like that cos I then get to say, what you mean when they stopped drawing Bambi's mum?

Heheh yeah yeah I know, but really, the old ones are the best, honest!:p

Hmn, something just occurred to me... can we have a link to this story? :D

Its title contains the word "happy", which is a synonym of "gay" and thus a sign of the secret homosexual agenda being pressed to drive our children to acts of immorality and sodomy! How much more proof do you need?! I say we ban it from theaters immediately!!!! Actually, let's ban theaters altogether, because we can construe pretty much anything as having a homosexual agenda! We should all go back to the Puritan lifestyle of our ancestors and forbid anything fun, because fun is SINFUL!

Have to be careful about that "Passion" movie. Here you have a young man who is still single (far past the age when men got married in those days), travelling around with 12 other men who have left their wives, going to parties, heading to the big city, staying up late.

And Judas kisses Jesus!

Hey. It's like "Brokeback Jerusalem" x 12.

Oi Oi don't knock Bambi mate!

Great film i like the bit when the mother dies. Coz it always gets people saying ohhh that was so sad, don't you think is was soooo sad when Bambi's mother died?

I like that cos I then get to say, what you mean when they stopped drawing Bambi's mum?

Heheh yeah yeah I know, but really, the old ones are the best, honest!:p

:p I did read somewhere, years ago, someone from a hunting organization sating that nothing had given them more PR problems than that movie.

Hmn, something just occurred to me... can we have a link to this story? :D
The Lewis Black quote was from last night's Daily Show. Don't know if it's up yet on the Comedy Central website.

I noticed that... there were certain parallels, though I have no idea whether or not they were deliberate.

Certainly, however, the main character, whatever his feet-tapping propensities, was adamantly heterosexual.

Happy Feet sucked!

What?

It shouldn't have been a great movie, but it was. Amazing.

Yeah, according to fox news, the new movie Happy Feet contains gay messages, including a baby penguin saying "You'll just have to accept me for who I am"

How homophobic do you have to be to have a penguin gaydar?
-Lewis Black

Pretty soon a whole new catagory of Disney slash porn will open up: Simba/Scar, Aladdin/Jafar, Tron/Sark(/MCP?), Ariel/Ursula, Hercules/Hades...all kinds of weird stuff.

Yeah, according to fox news, the new movie Happy Feet contains gay messages, including a baby penguin saying "You'll just have to accept me for who I am"

How homophobic do you have to be to have a penguin gaydar?
-Lewis Black

No wonder! Gay penguin propaganda is becoming more and more prevalent in this society! I've been saying that for years! Or at least months...

*Flashback to July 2006*
Yep - it'll all be better when the gay penguin overlords seize power :)


*Flashback to March 2006*
Flippers, wings, the important thing is that you seem to forget rule #1: Do not question the Gay Penguin overlords!

:D

Its title contains the word "happy", which is a synonym of "gay" and thus a sign of the secret homosexual agenda being pressed to drive our children to acts of immorality and sodomy! How much more proof do you need?! I say we ban it from theaters immediately!!!! Actually, let's ban theaters altogether, because we can construe pretty much anything as having a homosexual agenda! We should all go back to the Puritan lifestyle of our ancestors and forbid anything fun, because fun is SINFUL!Well don't just stop at "happy", let's take a look at "feet"! What are feet? Appendages. A-HA!

Penguins, like gay men, are sharp dressers.

Tuxedos, you know.

Fred Astaire wore a tuxedo in many of his films, and he also had happy feet.

Fred Astaire movies must, therefore, cause people to be gay.

I parsed that, it seemed to make sense.
I took a comfort break, during which I seriously questioned the idea that Fred was a penguin.
I came back and read it again. It made sense.

This time I am definitely going to bed. You're all insane!

I parsed that, it seemed to make sense.
I took a comfort break, during which I seriously questioned the idea that Fred was a penguin.
I came back and read it again. It made sense.

This time I am definitely going to bed. You're all insane!

http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/aetsch/cheeky-smiley-006.gif

Gee, I thought the movie came from two ideas:

1. The incredibly boring "March of the Penguins" and
2. Those funny penguins in the movie "Madagascar" who were better than the supposed stars.

I bet some studio people thought up Happy Feet, and said, "yeah, we need some manic people like Robin Williams to do voice overs..."

I don't think they thought it out any more than that...
Actually the movie has been in production for over 4 years. People don't realize how long it takes to make movies. Parallel production happens, it just does.
Oh my fucking God.

I haven't seen it, but from the reviews I've read, yes, of course it contains messages - the main one being that you can be different from anyone else but still be a worthy human being (or, well, penguin).

If that's what consitutes a "political" or even "pro-gay" message these days instead of simply a human and humane one, we're truly in a bad shape as a society.

Sheesh.

(not directed at you, Farnhamia! Just a general rant. ;) )
I dig the thing where Black points out, "Children's characters seeking acceptance means they're gay? That will come as news to Ferdinand, Simba, the Ugly Duckling, Cinderella, and Rudolph..."
Hmn, something just occurred to me... can we have a link to this story? :D

The Lewis Black quote was from last night's Daily Show. Don't know if it's up yet on the Comedy Central website.
It is. (http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=79201&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=%2Fmotherload%2Fmini_player.jhtml%3Fstart_open%3Dtrue%26ml_xml%3D%252Fmotherload%252Fx ml%252Fdata_mini.jhtml%253Fxml_id%253D24446&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=true)

Yes, acceptance of homosexuality is a major theme in the movie.

The pengiun, Mumble (Thanks, Soheran) can't mate the way the other penguins do. They all sing to attract mates, but he dances. He tries to sing and can't and is ridiculed and ostracized because of his different abilites. At one point, his father asks him to try to change and he basically says that he has and he can't.

It's not just the fact of accepting people with differing abilities. It's that it is so tied into mating that shows it's about unorthodox sexual activity. And it's tie into the second of the three themes doesn't help it.

The second theme is the stupidity of clinging to traditional religion. The elders of the penguin colony blame the lack of fish on the strange and unrepentant behavior of Mumble. Sound familiar? Gays are the reason we have things like Katrina and 9/11 according to some people. And instead of believing the stories about aliens (humans) taking away the fish, they would rather throw out the deviant memeber of their colony.

Doesn't paint traditional religion in a very favorable light, does it?

And how is the colony saved from the lack of fish? They adopt and accept Bubble and start dancing to make the humans notice them.

The third and least emphasized theme was the environmental one.

Teh gayyzzz have taken over San Francisko and now they'rreeee taking over Antarcccitkaaa!!! NOooooo---!!!!!

Teh gayyzzz have taken over San Francisko and now they'rreeee taking over Antarcccitkaaa!!! NOooooo---!!!!!

No realy, there are gay's in San Fransico?:eek:

Teh gayyzzz have taken over San Francisko and now they'rreeee taking over Antarcccitkaaa!!! NOooooo---!!!!!

As long as I don't have to fuck a penguin, that's ok with me.

Yes, acceptance of homosexuality is a major theme in the movie.

The pengiun (Bubble? I can't remember his name) can't mate the way the other penguins do. They all sing to attract mates, but he dances. He tries to sing and can't and is ridiculed and ostracized because of his different abilites. At one point, his father asks him to try to change and he basically says that he has and he can't.

It's not just the fact of accepting people with differing abilities. It's that it is so tied into mating that shows it's about unorthodox sexual activity.

Yet Mumble (not Bubble) gets the girl. By dancing.

Unorthodox, yes. Gay, not so clearly.

The second theme is the stupidity of clinging to traditional religion. The elders of the penguin colony blame the lack of fish on the strange and unrepentant behavior of Bubble. Sound familiar? Gays are the reason we have things like Katrina and 9/11 according to some people. And instead of believing the stories about aliens (humans) taking away the fish, they would rather throw out the deviant memeber of their colony.

Doesn't paint traditional religion in a very favorable light, does it?

The real attack is on the Elders, not on the religion. Many of the most powerful scenes in the movies were the religious ones; you don't make something you intend to mock that beautiful.

As long as I don't have to fuck a penguin, that's ok with me.

They've got a bunch of chilly willies anyway. :p

Yes, acceptance of homosexuality is a major theme in the movie.

The pengiun (Bubble? I can't remember his name) can't mate the way the other penguins do. They all sing to attract mates, but he dances. He tries to sing and can't and is ridiculed and ostracized because of his different abilites. At one point, his father asks him to try to change and he basically says that he has and he can't.

It's not just the fact of accepting people with differing abilities. It's that it is so tied into mating that shows it's about unorthodox sexual activity. And it's tie into the second of the three themes doesn't help it.

The second theme is the stupidity of clinging to traditional religion. The elders of the penguin colony blame the lack of fish on the strange and unrepentant behavior of Bubble. Sound familiar? Gays are the reason we have things like Katrina and 9/11 according to some people. And instead of believing the stories about aliens (humans) taking away the fish, they would rather throw out the deviant memeber of their colony.

Doesn't paint traditional religion in a very favorable light, does it?

And how is the colony saved from the lack of fish? They adopt and accept Bubble and start dancing to make the humans notice them.

The third and least emphasized theme was the environmental one.

Hmm, I may have to see this movie.

So, does the dancing penguin want to mate with other penguins of his gender? Somehow I think not.

Organized religion needs a kick in the pants now and then, say every 400 or 500 years. Martin Luther administered the last one, maybe an animated dancing penguin can get the next one going.

Hmm, I may have to see this movie.

So, does the dancing penguin want to mate with other penguins of his gender? Somehow I think not.

Organized religion needs a kick in the pants now and then, say every 400 or 500 years. Martin Luther administered the last one, maybe an animated dancing penguin can get the next one going.

That's the only problem I have with Hollywood - they actually believe that film is making a big difference.

Yet Mumble (not Bubble) gets the girl. By dancing.

Unorthodox, yes. Gay, not so clearly.

That's his name! Thank you.

Doesn't matter what it is exactly. The point is that it is in support of the acceptence of unorthodox mating/sexual behavior. If they came out and had two boy/male penguins marrying each other, how many impressionable youths would you have seeing the movie?

The real attack is on the Elders, not on the religion. Many of the most powerful scenes in the movies were the religious ones; you don't make something you intend to mock that beautiful.

You are correct, the attack is not on religion as a whole. But I maintain what I said: it is an attack on traditional, conservative religion.

They've got a bunch of chilly willies anyway. :p

Chilly cloacas.

That's his name! Thank you.

Doesn't matter what it is exactly. The point is that it is in support of the acceptence of unorthodox mating/sexual behavior. If they came out and had to boy penguins marrying each other, how many impressionable youths would you have seeing the movie?

I would hope for more. It was an awesome movie and a bit of gay romance would have made it better. Not to mention the potential social benefits.

You are correct, the attack is not on religion as a whole. But I maintain what I said: it is an attack on traditional, conservative religion.

But a very powerful picture of genuine, serious religion.

That's the only problem I have with Hollywood - they actually believe that film is making a big difference.

Hey, it's a mass medium. I bet more people will watch that movie than read the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal.

I wouldn't be caught dead at this Penguin Movie.

I mean, come on, movie tickets are like, nine bucks apiece for the evening showings. I don't have that kind of money to spend.

That's his name! Thank you.

Doesn't matter what it is exactly. The point is that it is in support of the acceptence of unorthodox mating/sexual behavior. If they came out and had two boy/male penguins marrying each other, how many impressionable youths would you have seeing the movie?
It couldn't possibly be that if you be who you are that people will like you for who you are, you know, like is the theme of like 80% of children's entertainment...nah, couldn't be that...it has to be the gay thing. In fact, children's entertainment has been trying for years to turn kids gay...apparently...they just suck at it with their around 10% success rate...



You are correct, the attack is not on religion as a whole. But I maintain what I said: it is an attack on traditional, conservative religion.
The stories of bucking tradition go back even farther.

Hey, it's a mass medium. I bet more people will watch that movie than read the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal.

Maybe it's the combination of overzealous self-aggrandizement on the part of Hollywood actors and directors, and the utter crap that most movies seem to be...

But a very powerful picture of genuine, serious religion.

Not really. I got more bad vibes from the movie about traditional religion than good about "genuine sincere religion"

And, most of those who support traditional religion are sincere and genuine. They just hold to the older ideas.

Old /=/ Outdated

Maybe it's the combination of overzealous self-aggrandizement on the part of Hollywood actors and directors, and the utter crap that most movies seem to be...

Maybe people just like movies.

Maybe it's the combination of overzealous self-aggrandizement on the part of Hollywood actors and directors, and the utter crap that most movies seem to be...

People in Hollywood have big egos? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you!

Yeah, a lot of movies are crap, too. So? No one's forcing you to watch them or to believe the hype. I personally find the antics of actors and such very amusing.

People in Hollywood have big egos? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you!

Yeah, a lot of movies are crap, too. So? No one's forcing you to watch them or to believe the hype. I personally find the antics of actors and such very amusing.

That's why I don't believe it when people say, "oh, Hollywood is going to convince the masses to think this way..."

It couldn't possibly be that if you be who you are that people will like you for who you are, you know, like is the theme of like 80% of children's entertainment...nah, couldn't be that...it has to be the gay thing. In fact, children's entertainment has been trying for years to turn kids gay...apparently...they just suck at it with their around 10% success rate...

Did you see the movie? I went with my brothers, my aunt, and my cousins. The three of us old enough to know about homosexuality were very certain that was the point. It went futher than "accept people for who they are."

And I don't like movies like that anyway. The point has no problem, but the application has a lot of problems. "Just because we're different doesn't mean we can't be friends" is of course true. But that's not the application which it has. It is applied to be "Everyone should be able to do whatever they want, because everyone is different!"

The stories of bucking tradition go back even farther.

I never said they didn't. I was pointing out that this goes a little further.

I really don't watch many kids movies. But, aside from my age, they're all littered with things like "Evil tradition!" and "Accept everyone as being equal and don't look down on anything they do."

Did you see the movie? I went with my brothers, my aunt, and my cousins. The three of us old enough to know about homosexuality were very certain that was the point. It went futher than "accept people for who they are."

And I don't like movies like that anyway. The point has no problem, but the application has a lot of problems. "Just because we're different doesn't mean we can't be friends" is of course true. But that's not the application which it has. It is applied to be "Everyone should be able to do whatever they want, because everyone is different!"



I never said they didn't. I was pointing out that this goes a little further.

I really don't watch many kids movies. But, aside from my age, they're all littered with things like "Evil tradition!" and "Accept everyone as being equal and don't look down on anything they do."


:eek: The HORROR!!! :eek:

Did you see the movie? I went with my brothers, my aunt, and my cousins. The three of us old enough to know about homosexuality were very certain that was the point. It went futher than "accept people for who they are."

And I don't like movies like that anyway. The point has no problem, but the application has a lot of problems. "Just because we're different doesn't mean we can't be friends" is of course true. But that's not the application which it has. It is applied to be "Everyone should be able to do whatever they want, because everyone is different!"



I never said they didn't. I was pointing out that this goes a little further.

I really don't watch many kids movies. But, aside from my age, they're all littered with things like "Evil tradition!" and "Accept everyone as being equal and don't look down on anything they do."
Sounds to me like the problem isn't the film(s) but the baggage you're bringing to them. Unless you're John Lithgow in Footloose I just don't see how accepting dancing is the same as 'anything goes.'

Not really. I got more bad vibes from the movie about traditional religion than good about "genuine sincere religion"

Eh, maybe it struck us in different ways.

Keep in mind that you're speaking to an atheist skeptic who hadn't been emotionally moved in months before he saw the movie... it probably had an abnormal effect on me.

And, most of those who support traditional religion are sincere and genuine. They just hold to the older ideas.

Or perhaps (not necessarily) they are just prejudiced and intolerant. As was the case with the Elders, and which is the point the movie was making.

:eek: The HORROR!!! :eek:

Do you here me complaining? Screaming "Evil Hollywood!"?

No. They are only putting into their movies (and books, and radio programs, and CD's, and whatever else) the values which they hold.

Do I think that most of those values are smut and bunk? Yes, but I can't stop them from doing what they are doing anymore than they can stop me from doing the same.

I think they should repent and make movies about traditional Christian morality, but until they come to Christ (or until society as a whole at least acts as if it has come to Christ) they won't change.

So, I point out their motives and move on.

And I don't like movies like that anyway. The point has no problem, but the application has a lot of problems. "Just because we're different doesn't mean we can't be friends" is of course true. But that's not the application which it has. It is applied to be "Everyone should be able to do whatever they want, because everyone is different!"

Honestly... it was a dancing penguin. A dancing penguin! Not a serial killer.

Sounds to me like the problem isn't the film(s) but the baggage you're bringing to them. Unless you're John Lithgow in Footloose I just don't see how accepting dancing is the same as 'anything goes.'

Again, did you see the movie? If not, see it and I think it will be pretty obvious how their point can be interpreted as supporting the acceptance of homosexuality.

Or perhaps (not necessarily) they are just prejudiced and intolerant. As was the case with the Elders, and which is the point the movie was making.

I don't think that was the point. The stuff about their god (whose name I can't remember) always protecting them and doing as they have always done and especially the part about the god "giving and taking away" (a nearly direct quote from the Bible) lead me to think otherwise.

Honestly... it was a dancing penguin. A dancing penguin! Not a serial killer.

And this is the point.

"It's just two consenting adults. It's not like they're hurting anyone!"

Do you here me complaining? Screaming "Evil Hollywood!"?

No. They are only putting into their movies (and books, and radio programs, and CD's, and whatever else) the values which they hold.

Do I think that most of those values are smut and bunk? Yes, but I can't stop them from doing what they are doing anymore than they can stop me from doing the same.

I think they should repent and make movies about traditional Christian morality, but until they come to Christ (or until society as a whole at least acts as if it has come to Christ) they won't change.

So, I point out their motives and move on.

I think that when christians can embrace traditional christian morality, then maybe they might just have a right to complain.

But until they do, I think they just come off as hypocritical.

Afterall, who did Jesus embrace? Sinners. :)

Again, did you see the movie? If not, see it and I think it will be pretty obvious how their point can be interpreted as supporting the acceptance of homosexuality.

Even if it does, so? Why should we give a fuck? Oh, I forget, being gay is bad because you're an anachronism and have very ugly ideas.

I don't think that was the point. The stuff about their god (whose name I can't remember)

The Great Guin.

always protecting them

And didn't He?

Consider - they prayed for the Great Guin to protect them. And then Mumble's father let go of the egg, causing the chain of events that would lead to their salvation.

and doing as they have always done

Surely you would grant that an uncomprimising adherence to tradition can be problematic?

and especially the part about the god "giving and taking away" (a nearly direct quote from the Bible)

It was not the framework of "giving and taking away" that was rejected; rather, the notion that something innate and benign (Mumble's dancing) caused the crisis.

I think that when christians can embrace traditional christian morality, then maybe they might just have a right to complain.

But until they do, I think they just come off as hypocritical.

Afterall, who did Jesus embrace? Sinners. :)

There is a difference between embracing the sinner (which we are most definately to do) and embracing the sin (which is what society wants us to do), to put our seal of approval on the sin, to say "It's not what I want, but if you want it, that's okay with me."

I think you over estimate human strength. Christians are still sinners. They are going to continue sinning until they die. But, they should be aiming for Christ's holiness and perfection. Every person is a hypocrite. We all do things we say we oughtn't. But the question is "Are we Hypocrites (note the capital H)?" Do we make a life-style of being hypocrites?

And this is the point.

"It's just two consenting adults. It's not like they're hurting anyone!"

And that is the point, it's just two consenting adults, not hurting each other or anyone else.

And this is the point.

"It's just two consenting adults. It's not like they're hurting anyone!"

Okay, you have me there. Objecting to dancing penguins is about as rational as objecting to gay couples.

Even if it does, so? Why should we give a fuck? Oh, I forget, being gay is bad because you're an anachronism and have very ugly ideas.

It's all patently clear now-only gays and minorities can dance...in fact, that's how we know they got the devil in 'em...so accepting a dancing penguin is accepting those who can dance and those who can dance clearly have the devil in 'em...I get it now...

Sorry Fass, I guess I didn't really need to quote you for that. meh...

It's all patently clear now-only gays and minorities can dance...in fact, that's how we know they got the devil in 'em...so accepting a dancing penguin is accepting those who can dance and those who can dance clearly have the devil in 'em...I get it now...

Sorry Fass, I guess I didn't really need to quote you for that. meh...

Well, and black people dance pretty good, too, except most of them are exemplary Christians so that makes them sort of okay.

It really does come down to growing up and letting go of the imaginary friend that the Hebrews found in the desert. And "I don't like it but if you want it, it's okay with me" is a fairly grown-up attitude.

It's true! Movies do indeed indoctinate you. In fact, after watching "The Passion Of The Christ", I developed a sadomasochism fetish.

The Great Guin.

Thank you.

And didn't He?

Consider - they prayed for the Great Guin to protect them. And then Mumble's father let go of the egg, causing the chain of events that would lead to their salvation.

So, the great Guin predestined that this egg should be their salvation?

Hmmmm....there might be a Calvinist influence on this movie. I may have to reconsider it.

Surely you would grant that an uncomprimising adherence to tradition can be problematic?

No. I grant that a tradition can be problematic. And it is dangerous to adhere to any tradition without being sure that it is securely correct. But to uncomprimisingly adhere to Tradition (I normally don't capitilize it, but will for my point) when you are securely sure that it is correct is not problematic. In fact, it would be sinful to do otherwise. And once you are shown that it is not correct, is would be a sin to cling to it still.

It was not the framework of "giving and taking away" that was rejected; rather, the notion that something innate and benign (Mumble's dancing) caused the crisis.

That was a point yes, but not the point, I think.

And that is the point, it's just two consenting adults, not hurting each other or anyone else.

You're taking me out of context.

It's all patently clear now-only gays and minorities can dance...in fact, that's how we know they got the devil in 'em...so accepting a dancing penguin is accepting those who can dance and those who can dance clearly have the devil in 'em...I get it now...

Sorry Fass, I guess I didn't really need to quote you for that. meh...

No biggie, but our comments still stand. On one side one has a cute film that teaches children that it's OK to be different, and if you want to buy the argument, OK to be gay, and on the other side one has Edwardis and his ilk who like to spread hate and guilt and well all the other disgusting accoutrements and inanities of religion, and for some reason we're supposed to oppose the film and not them.

It's quite kooky indeed, so whom one quotes is not all that important in this bizarro thread.

You're taking me out of context.

Maybe, but I do understand where you're coming from.

So, the great Guin predestined that this egg should be their salvation?

Hmmmm....there might be a Calvinist influence on this movie. I may have to reconsider it.

Well, the notion of a divinely-chosen savior is pretty universal.

But to uncomprimisingly adhere to Tradition (I normally don't capitilize it, but will for my point) when you are securely sure that it is correct is not problematic.

Of course. But to make this point is to miss the point, because the problem is that you never can be securely sure that it is correct.

It's true! Movies do indeed indoctinate you. In fact, after watching "The Passion Of The Christ", I developed a sadomasochism fetish.

Zing! (http://www.ilovewavs.com/Effects/Music/RimShot.wav)

There is a difference between embracing the sinner (which we are most definately to do) and embracing the sin (which is what society wants us to do), to put our seal of approval on the sin, to say "It's not what I want, but if you want it, that's okay with me."

I think you over estimate human strength. Christians are still sinners. They are going to continue sinning until they die. But, they should be aiming for Christ's holiness and perfection. Every person is a hypocrite. We all do things we say we oughtn't. But the question is "Are we Hypocrites (note the capital H)?" Do we make a life-style of being hypocrites?

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree because I think the sins Jesus preached about were exclusion, judging others and intolerance. Jesus ministered to those who had no voice. He led by example. He didn't decide what was, and wasn't sin because he knew the truth; That sin is in the heart, not in the eyes of others.

Well, the notion of a divinely-chosen savior is pretty universal.

Not the divine ordering of things so that the freely-chosen actions of the hero/savior brings salvation. Most hero/saviors have the plan revealed to them and must conciously choose to follow it.

Of course. But to make this point is to miss the point, because the problem is that you never can be securely sure that it is correct.

Can't you?

Can't you?

You can be pretty convinced, but you can't ever be securely sure.

What happens if someone comes up with a brilliant argument that utterly proves your position wrong?

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree because I think the sins Jesus preached about were exclusion, judging others and intolerance. Jesus ministered to those who had no voice. He led by example. He didn't decide what was, and wasn't sin because he knew the truth; That sin is in the heart, not in the eyes of others.

Do you apply the same logic to serial killers?

Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree because I think the sins Jesus preached about were exclusion, judging others and intolerance. Jesus ministered to those who had no voice. He led by example. He didn't decide what was, and wasn't sin because he knew the truth; That sin is in the heart, not in the eyes of others.

You're taking His teachings out of the context of His other teachings.

Why did He say not to judge and then in the very same sermon say that you will know a tree by its fruit? Surely, if you're looking at the fruit to see what kind of tree it is, you're judging?

Jesus never spoke against intolerance. He spoke only against bigotry.
Tolerance = do what you want
Intolerance = you are wrong. I love you and want you to repent, but you need to repent, you can't keeo doing what you're doing
Bigot = Burn in Hell!!!!!!!

Jesus never said that there was no sin in the action.

Well, I have to go take a test of genetics!

OH BOY!!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

Not really. I got more bad vibes from the movie about traditional religion than good about "genuine sincere religion"

And, most of those who support traditional religion are sincere and genuine. They just hold to the older ideas.

Old /=/ Outdated

Well, then, that's you. There's one in support of your thesis. Any more?

Do you here me complaining? Screaming "Evil Hollywood!"?

No. They are only putting into their movies (and books, and radio programs, and CD's, and whatever else) the values which they hold.

Do I think that most of those values are smut and bunk? Yes, but I can't stop them from doing what they are doing anymore than they can stop me from doing the same.

I think they should repent and make movies about traditional Christian morality, but until they come to Christ (or until society as a whole at least acts as if it has come to Christ) they won't change.

So, I point out their motives and move on.

No, sir. Do not trot out your own baggage and claim it's reasonable. You're pointing out what you PERCEIVE to be their motives. That says far more about you than it does the film or those who made it. You're seeing what you want to see because once you're convinced that homosexuality is evil or a disease or unnatural, you begin to obsess about it. That's your prerogative, of course, but don't expect to go unconfronted when you try to assume that anyone but you thinks that way, or that anyone gets that opinion without a lot of indoctrination.

Again, did you see the movie? If not, see it and I think it will be pretty obvious how their point can be interpreted as supporting the acceptance of homosexuality.

Indeed -- there is no way into which a work of art or fiction cannot be twisted if you really want to see it.

A previous post just pointed out that Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, with it's far-too-old-to-be-unmarried man walking around with 12 other men who left their wives and Judas kiss, COULD be interpreted as pro-gay. Is it accurate? No. But COULD it be seen that way? Sure. But, much like you, that perception takes work. Imaginitive work.

And this is the point.

"It's just two consenting adults. It's not like they're hurting anyone!"

...and they aren't. Your point?

Well, the notion of a divinely-chosen savior is pretty universal.
*snip*


It is? Which religions besides Christianity has one?

Islam? No. Muhammad isn't due to return, or we'd be hearing a lot more about it.

Buddhism? Not that I'm aware of -- the Buddha said "Nirvana's pretty cool, you should strive for it" and took off. No savior there.

Hinduism? Perhaps, but it'd take some serious reading and reading into of a lot of texts and different gods.

Judaism? Yes, the Messiah, but they don't think he's come yet.

Shinto? Not unless a savior is coming back as a plant or animal.

I'd say that's a long way from universal, and I didn't cover the pantheists or animists.

It is? Which religions besides Christianity has one?

Islam? No. Muhammad isn't due to return, or we'd be hearing a lot more about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi

Buddhism? Not that I'm aware of -- the Buddha said "Nirvana's pretty cool, you should strive for it" and took off. No savior there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya

Hinduism? Perhaps, but it'd take some serious reading and reading into of a lot of texts and different gods.

I don't know about Hinduism.

Judaism? Yes, the Messiah, but they don't think he's come yet.

So? There's still a prophecy.

Shinto? Not unless a savior is coming back as a plant or animal.

Don't know of any.

Indeed -- there is no way into which a work of art or fiction cannot be twisted if you really want to see it.

It isn't that much of a stretch, though. The elements are there.

It isn't that much of a stretch, though. The elements are there.

Like I said, "Brokeback Jerusalem"

It's a movie. It's a cartoon about little penguins who dance and sing around on a big piece of ice. Nobody forces anybody else to go see it. If your 4-year-old demands to see the movie and you don't want to, be a grownup and say "No." Same goes for all that other "wicked Hollywood" stuff.

Oh, not to put too fine a point to it all.... Happy Feet gets the girl in the end and they're going off to make a little egg of their own. Gay? Not by any definition I know.

Like I said, "Brokeback Jerusalem"

Now that's a stretch.

I really don't watch many kids movies. But, aside from my age, they're all littered with things like "Evil tradition!" and "Accept everyone as being equal and don't look down on anything they do."

And why is this bad?

Now that's a stretch.

33 year old man, never dated a woman, not married (at a time when men were married at half that age). Hanging out with 12 other guys who left their wives for an extended road trip.

Judas kisses Jesus as a form of greeting...


Ummm... yeah. I think I have a better case than for Happy Feet being a gay movie.

33 year old man, never dated a woman, not married (at a time when men were married at half that age). Hanging out with 12 other guys who left their wives for an extended road trip.

And, he's into S&M. See how much he was enjoying being nailed to that cross? He wanted to suffer, ostensibly so that the sins of the world could be cleansed but really because he was enjoying it! Of course, he did die as a minor side-effect, but that was the Romans' fault for forgetting to take him down on time. It was sheer professional negligence; Mary should've sued them.