In the madcap world of gender and religious politics in the United States, Roy and Silo, two male penguins at New York City's Central Park Zoo, were a cause célèbre for years. They spawned a children's book And Tango Makes Three, of which The School Library Journal said, “They cuddle and share a nest like the other penguin couples and when all the others start hatching eggs, they want to be parents, too.”
For pro-gay ideologues, Roy and Silo were proof that homosexuality is natural — seen commonly in nature. That is perhaps why March of the Penguins was taken up by conservative ideologues when it opened in theatres last summer. The documentary, which won at the Oscars this year, is the account of one year in the life of a colony of emperor penguins in Antarctica.
Conservative film critic Michael Medved said of the movie that it “most passionately affirms traditional norms like monogamy, sacrifice and child rearing … This is the first movie [many religious conservatives have] enjoyed since The Passion of the Christ. This is the passion of the penguins.”
Churches organized trips to see the movie — the way they had The Passion. Ben Hunt, with the 153 House Churches Network of Ohio, said, “Some of the circumstances they experienced seemed to parallel those of Christians. The penguin falling behind is like some Christians falling behind. The path changes every year, yet they find their way, is like the Holy Spirit.” (I'd love to hear what he does with Carl Jung.)
This was proof to conservative ideologues of intelligent design — that God had made the penguins, apparently to teach humans a lesson about family values. The editor of National Review told a youth gathering, “It is an amazing movie. And I have to say; penguins are the really ideal example of monogamy. These things — the dedication of these birds is just amazing.”
If you've seen the documentary, you might be scratching your head over all this: Penguins are serially monogamous, changing partners each year. And, while they work communally to protect the young, they seem sanguine amongst adults: If a penguin falls behind, a penguin dies. After mating, the females go for a beach holiday while the males protect the egg in the 50-below winds. I know at least one woman who would love that to be instituted. (Hi, dear!)
And, not to deny that God made these surreal creatures, they don't seem to be ideally designed for their circumstances. While graceful in water, they walk awkwardly, adding much stress and effort to their annual mating trek. They keep the eggs on their feet, warming them with a little flap of skin, which is a good way to lose them whenever they have to be passed between mother and father. It's not the strongest evidence for an argument on intelligent design or family values. Then again, I'm not a frothing ideologue.
But there are many who fill my void: Worldnetdaily.com is a conservative website and it was practically chortling when Silo left Roy to hook up with a female penguin. Columnist Robert Knight wrote, “For homosexual activists, embarrassment over this penguin breakup has to rank right up there with Anne Heche leaving Ellen De Generes and marrying … a man.” Along the way he took an egregious shot at the New York Times: “[The newspaper] has been annoyed of late because the hit movie March of the Penguins is stubbornly heterosexual and pro-family with nary a gay penguin in sight.”
Poor Times. The Left loves to quote it as the voice of the military-industrial complex — Noam Chomsky fills his essays with its articles. The Right quotes it as proof of a lefty agenda. What neither side, filled with its own narrow definitions, seems to understand is that reportage is only raw material — it proves nothing unto itself. If we have anything to learn from penguins, it is as C.S. Lewis once said, that nature is merely a mirror that reflects back what we believe.
