'March of the Penguins' vs. March for Women's Lives

  • Thread starter Thread starter PLAL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
continued…

Mothers assume care of the chicks so fathers can trod 70 miles to the sea to eat. For the next several months the two will take turns caring for their baby and shuttling back and forth to the ocean, until their baby is old enough to fend for itself.
As I watched MOTP, I wondered how people could ooh and aww when baby penguins pecked out of their shells, or cover their eyes when a giant petrel attacked a baby penguin, yet not give a thought to the dismemberment and killing of human babies.

I wondered, what would it take for people to connect? I juxtaposed the willingness of penguins to freeze and starve to death for their babies to the unwillingness of humans to forfeit any indulgence whatsoever for their babies.

I remembered last year’s March for Women’s Lives in Washington, D.C., when pro-aborts gathered to bolster their right to kill babies.

I thought, maybe a penguin movie analogy would help people understand.

The movie would open with militant feminist penguins marching to their ancient political breeding ground, where lusting, self-centered males waited. There they would all serial-mate, despising the prospect of producing babies. Should the unthinkable happen, close-ups would show frenzied penguins pecking open eggs and ripping babies apart, or inserting little hoses into the eggs to suction babies out. Fathers would abandon mothers who changed their minds and wanted to keep their eggs to fend for themselves.

But a movie like that won’t ever be made, because it would expose anti-lifers as demented.

Still, I sometimes wish humans would behave more like animals.

Jill Stanek fought to stop “live-birth abortion” after witnessing one as a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Ill. In 2002, President Bush asked Jill to attend his signing of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. In January 2003, World Magazine named Jill one of the 30 most prominent pro-life leaders of the past 30 years. To learn more, visit Jill’s blog, Pro-life Pulse.

----------------------------

jillstanek.net/
 
great analogy, thanks for posting! I especially thought the pro-abort movie idea was good.
 
jillstanek.net/

September 14, 2005
NYT quotes my “March of Penguins” column and comments on movie’s cultural impact
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/penguins.jpg Yesterday’s New York Times included an article entitled, “March of the Conservatives: Penguin Film as Political Fodder.” I am reprinting it on page 2 in case you can’t open NYT online.

March of the Penguins is now the second highest grossing documentary ever, behind Farenheit 911.

The first paragraph of the piece stated:

*On the conservative Web site WorldNetDaily.com, an opponent of abortion wrote that the movie “verified the beauty of life and the rightness of protecting it.”*The unnamed “opponent of abortion” would be me.

Continue reading “NYT quotes my “March of Penguins” column and comments on movie’s cultural impact”
 
i notice the NY Times article didn’t touch on the pro-life
aspect of the movie… which it seems to me is the most
obvious aspect of comparison…

🙂
 
jillstanek.net/

**September 21, 2005
**March of the Pro-Aborts
A September 13 article ***New York Times ***set the stage.

***March of the Penguins ***is now the second highest grossing documentary of all time, thanks in large part to its popularity among conservatives.

This intrigued the NYT, I’m sure in no small measure because the highest grossing documentary is Farenheit 911, made so by liberals.

The NYT verged on mocking conservatives for making cultural analogies to the instinctive family routines of penguins, but not quite.

Leave that to tailgating secularist columnists, who can’t stand the thought of Christians seeing Intelligent Design and lessons for humans in nature, if the lessons have anything to do with Biblical morality.

Neither can they stand the possbility of us bumping their inventive documentary from its top spot.

And so the ridicule has begun, using in part my column on the movie as fodder.

In “‘Penguins’ movie dubbed pro-life, other flights of fancy,” **John MacDonald **writes in the Arizona Republic (see page 2 to read entire piece here):

*eeing the movie as supporting one side of the abortion debate is an even bigger reach. Jill Stanek, a commentator for WorldNetDaily with far too much time to think, wrote after seeing the movie, “I juxtaposed the willingness of penguins to freeze and starve to death for their babies to the unwillingness of humans to forfeit any indulgence whatsoever for their babies.” Penguins aren’t “willing.” Penguins are penguins. What’s next? A pro-life review of Dumbo?

It’s a movie. It’s a beautiful movie about God’s creatures surviving even when it seems they shouldn’t. Just watch, keep quiet and pass the popcorn.*

Lenore Skenazy writes, in her **New York Daily News **piece entitled, “GOP’s fowl language is lost on me” (also reprinted in full on page 2):

This documentary is not only the blockbuster of the summer, it has become something bigger - “The Passion of the Iced.” Through a quirk of nature stranger than the penguins’ own ability to knock flippers at 70 degrees below zero, American conservatives are embracing this sex-drenched film as the epitome of everything they hold dear. And not just because its waddling stars remind them fondly of Rush Limbaugh…

“Almost every scene,” opined anti-abortion activist Jill Stanek, “verified the beauty of life and the rightness of protecting it.”

(A movie showing penguins “ripping babies apart,” she added, would illustrate the pro-choice side.)

Indeed. Love that she mentioned that.

I imagine MacDonald and Skenazy must have grown up hating Aesop’s Fables.

On the other hand, it’s interesting that the basis for secular humanism is the theory of evolution. Isn’t that based entirely on Darwin’s observation that apes and humans have similar characteristics?

My, how some of us have evolved.
 
continued…

Fr. Robert Altier’s (Relevant Radio) Daily Audio Homily’s from St. Agnes Church in St. Paul, MN

Click Here to LISTEN desertvoice.org/Audio.html

relevantradio.com/docs/index.asp?categoryid=562



The daily homilies ofhttp://www.desertvoice.org/Image/space.gif** Father Robert Altier **given to the faithful at the Church of Saint Agnes in Saint Paul, Minnesota.

A desert in bloom speaks a language of praise,
Its beauty in stillness grows rich beyond sight.
Adorned for a banquet her splendid array,
Whose barrenness blooms for the King, His delight.
Creation her beauty inspired it sings,
In likeness to once a poor maiden avowed;
Resounding her elegance mystical brings,
Humility speaks exaltation aloud.
My heart gives in silence to love a great voice,
I cross my true passion, desires refine;
Ulterior motives suspended by choice;
To suffer rejoicing for love is divine.
http://www.desertvoice.org/Image/space.gif In everything immanent Spirit reside;
http://www.desertvoice.org/Image/space.gif Indwelling the darkness enlightened abide.

*- Father Robert Altier *
 
quick reality check.
  1. Huge numbers of penguin eggs and chicks come to nothing due to harsh conditions in the artic. how can this be taken as evidence of ‘intelligent design’. See whales for an example of warm blooded creatures breeding in cold waters for better options.
  2. The penguins in question mate only for a year. They are serial monogamists
  3. Penguins in general have one the highest recorded incidences of homosexuality. male-male couple will even incubate eggs, given real eggs they are great parents. Thus penguins are evidence that homos are cool by god, and great daddies.
  4. Spiders and praying mantises eat their mates…watch it lads, women might take a moral from that fact.
  5. The existance of the artic itself calls into question ID, afterall what could its purpose be except to kill million of penguin chicks and eggs?
  6. the limited monogamy of penhuins is better reflected in swans (who also have homo-couples) who mate for a very long time, and in other species. but other species, like pheasants use leking, and a single male gets to breed with dozens of females. shall we take lessons there?
  7. people here say we cant take lessons from animals. they are animals. surely they should be on this thread repeating this anti-gay argument amongst those who seek to take pro-life (what?!!) pro-marriage lessons from this film.
 
40.png
2perfection:
quick reality check.
  1. Huge numbers of penguin eggs and chicks come to nothing due to harsh conditions in the artic. how can this be taken as evidence of ‘intelligent design’. See whales for an example of warm blooded creatures breeding in cold waters for better options.
  2. The penguins in question mate only for a year. They are serial monogamists
  3. Penguins in general have one the highest recorded incidences of homosexuality. male-male couple will even incubate eggs, given real eggs they are great parents. Thus penguins are evidence that homos are cool by god, and great daddies.
  4. Spiders and praying mantises eat their mates…watch it lads, women might take a moral from that fact.
  5. The existance of the artic itself calls into question ID, afterall what could its purpose be except to kill million of penguin chicks and eggs?
  6. the limited monogamy of penhuins is better reflected in swans (who also have homo-couples) who mate for a very long time, and in other species. but other species, like pheasants use leking, and a single male gets to breed with dozens of females. shall we take lessons there?
  7. people here say we cant take lessons from animals. they are animals. surely they should be on this thread repeating this anti-gay argument amongst those who seek to take pro-life (what?!!) pro-marriage lessons from this film.
Click to expand...
You’re kidding, right? After all, it’s just an analogy not a proof of anything. No one said it was, so why take it to this extreme? In fact, why all the shrill sarcasm and nasty comments from people who disagree? What? Aren’t conservatives allowed to make comparisons or think after seeing a film? Are we all really just supposed to sit there, eat popcorn and shut up? Oh, I get it, only pro-life people aren’t supposed to think after seeing a movie lest, God forbid, they get anything out of it that inspires them or speaks to what they believe. Right.
 
40.png
Della:
You’re kidding, right? After all, it’s just an analogy not a proof of anything. No one said it was, so why take it to this extreme? In fact, why all the shrill sarcasm and nasty comments from people who disagree? What? Aren’t conservatives allowed to make comparisons or think after seeing a film? Are we all really just supposed to sit there, eat popcorn and shut up? Oh, I get it, only pro-life people aren’t supposed to think after seeing a movie lest, God forbid, they get anything out of it that inspires them or speaks to what they believe. Right.
Click to expand...
well, the obvious response it that as ‘analogies’ go, it is not even close to being anaolgous.

accuracy is important in analogies because one is trying to explain A in terms of X. if X is not analogous and the listener knows this your argument fails. False anaologies attempt to trick ignorant listeners.

And as for ‘shrill’ reread the thread so far. it reads like people trying to defend a killer argument which has been found to be a cardboard cut out.
 
40.png
2perfection:
And as for ‘shrill’ reread the thread so far. it reads like people trying to defend a killer argument which has been found to be a cardboard cut out.
Click to expand...
There was no argument on this thread until you posted, 2perfection.

The struggles of the Emporer penguins reminded us here of how precious life is. No-one mentioned homosexuality.

What exactly are you arguing? I’m not sure I understand.
 
At least animals have the sense to reproduce! Unlike human societies, which tend toward infertility, escapism, and self-annihilating behaviors as marks of “civilization.” Hell even the average house sparrow has more sense than we do.
 
40.png
2perfection:
well, the obvious response it that as ‘analogies’ go, it is not even close to being anaolgous.

accuracy is important in analogies because one is trying to explain A in terms of X. if X is not analogous and the listener knows this your argument fails. False anaologies attempt to trick ignorant listeners.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone thought the analogy was necessarily a perfect one, or that we ought to imitate animal life in every way, rather it was more of an insight or inspiration. Surely we’re allowed to have these. 😉
And as for ‘shrill’ reread the thread so far. it reads like people trying to defend a killer argument which has been found to be a cardboard cut out.
Click to expand...
I do apologize for not being clear. I meant the criticisms by the article writers not you. Your analogies weren’t perfect, either, though, you know. Really, the natural life of animals bear some similarities between our life and theirs, but we are to learn things from them and their behaviors not necessarily imitate them in all ways. We have consciences and a sense that we ought to do this or that or not do this or that, they don’t. We are accountable before God for our behavior because we are created in his image, while they are not. It’s all a matter of perspective.
 
Thats a really inspirational article.I HATE abortion.March of the Penguins is one of my very favourite films.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top