Gay Feet

Over the last week my little family has watched two feature-length movies about penguins. Although one film was a documentary shot by some "slightly crazy" (their words--not mine) Frenchmen in Antarctica and the other was cranked out by computer, both spotlighted the intriguing life of the little tuxedo-wearing birds. My wife and kids all oohed and aahed over the fuzzy little baby penguins. We laughed at the funny gait of the penguins as they ambled over the wintry wasteland back and forth to the sea from their mating ground. Although the real-life birds couldn't dance or speak English, they just as ably captured our hearts.

What's the important difference between these two movies? I am not going to allow one of the movies to be seen in my home. I wish I had been more prepared before viewing the movie--because then my family would not have seen it in the first place. The movie, of course, is "Happy Feet"-- a movie geared toward children while somewhat subtly promoting homosexuality and disrespect for religious authority.

Wow! That's a pretty weighty accusation to put out on the internet where anyone could read it. I didn't want to believe that a major film studio could be brazen enough to put that kind of trash into a kids' movie. Maybe I hadn't heard right.

"Son, you can do this. It ain't so hard."

"Don't ask me to change, Pa, because I can't."

This dialogue between father and errant son takes place after the religious elders of the penguins have tried to get to the bottom of why Mumbles, the heterosexual leading man (or penguin), is so different. It turns out that he was just born that way, supposedly because his dad dropped him as an egg. While discussing Mumble's tendency to break out into dance instead of the traditional penguin singing, his father says, "It's just not 'penguin!'"

Okay, so I did hear it right, but is did the writers really mean to have Mumbles' bias for boogying be a metaphor for being homosexual? Maybe I'm reading into the script too much--I'm just sensitized to the "gay" thing because I'm a conservative who has had his voice on the issue of same-sex marriage squelched by an angry liberal minority. Maybe it's as simple as that....

But then my wife turns to me after the movie, and asks, "Was it just me, or....?"

And then, a few minutes later, as we walked into Walmart, some friends from our church knowingly asked, "Oh! 'Happy Feet.' Soooo, what did you think about....?"

Then I got online... wow! I began to realize that I had missed some of the innuendos. I had caught the false prophet's "I shall retire to my couch of perpetual indulgence. Okay ladies, who's first?" but had missed his implied f-bomb. (That would have been when I walked out with my family in tow.) Still, there's enough outright leftist propaganda that I want to ask, along with Jim, "Did they think Christians wouldn't notice? I suppose the creators just didn't care."

Now I've been working on this post off-and-on for four days. Let me just wrap up with this: Where was the mainstream media coverage of the darker side of "Happy Feet?" Why wasn't the homosexual agenda publicized so that parents could decide whether or not to take their children to see the film? Ahh. Just answered my own question.

Shame on Fox-Warner for engaging in deceptive practices in order to swindle me out of a few bucks. Shame on my for thinking I could trust a major studio. Well, one of us is wiser now.

No comments: