Wham Rocks Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 My favorite site on the internet, a Christian hate organization known as the American Family Association is up in arms over the hidden pro-homosexual message in a new children's movie. Included is a hilarious article about how the new DreamWorks flick, Shark Tale, is a surefire way to indoctrinate innocent children into the dark underworld of homosexual deviancy. And what is so gay about it? A shark named Lenny, voiced by Jack Black, prefers to be a vegetarian unlike his masculine, flesh-eating shark counterparts. He also prefers to dress like a dolphin, which are far more friendly than the ornery, bloodthirsty sharks. These activities, of course, could invariably lead to other effeminate traits like... homosexuality. And better yet (spoiler), since Lenny reconciles these issues with the other sharks rather than die a horrible death, the AFA believes DreamWorks is suggesting that homosexuality is okay. I've seen lesser leaps of logic in 1970's Batman movies, but whatever floats their boat. So anyway, if you want your kids to be awesome, flesh-eating hetorosexuals, keep them the hell away from gay propaganda like Shark's Tale! The AFA is great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 You're so right to ridicule them. I think my children need to see everything Hollywood makes and markets to them. Where else will they learn about life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Good stuff TB. I usually don't read the extreme whacko sites, but seeing as how this one is pretty influential, especially over what gets aired and what doesn't, I checked it out. Unreal. Shrek is about accepting premarital sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Good stuff TB. I usually don't read the extreme whacko sites, but seeing as how this one is pretty influential, especially over what gets aired and what doesn't, I checked it out. Unreal. Shrek is about accepting premarital sex. 131646[/snapback] It's amazing the nerve of those people. Inciting consumers to make phone calls and write postcards to advertisers of shows they don't like. Bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 And what is so gay about it? A shark named Lenny, voiced by Jack Black 131467[/snapback] haven't seen it and don't plan on it. not because of the 'homosexual' thing. the jack black thing makes it sound pretty gay (and i don't mean in a homosexual way) jack black = rj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 haven't seen it and don't plan on it. not because of the 'homosexual' thing. the jack black thing makes it sound pretty gay (and i don't mean in a homosexual way) jack black = rj 131687[/snapback] Jack Black "jumped the shark" a long time ago. Maybe he's got a thing for gay fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 It's amazing the nerve of those people. Inciting consumers to make phone calls and write postcards to advertisers of shows they don't like. Bastards. 131678[/snapback] If they don't like it, why don't they simply not watch it rather than begin a campaign to remove it as a choice for those of us who want to see it? I assume that since they hate these films and what-not so much that they aren't watching them. What then is the point of also writing to advertisers who fund TV shows or studios who finance films if not to prevent the rest of us from having that choice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 If they don't like it, why don't they simply not watch it rather than begin a campaign to remove it as a choice for those of us who want to see it? I assume that since they hate these films and what-not so much that they aren't watching them. What then is the point of also writing to advertisers who fund TV shows or studios who finance films if not to prevent the rest of us from having that choice? 131964[/snapback] They gave the two films mentioned, Shark Tale and Shrek 4&1/2 stars out of 5, with their opinions about the morality of them and whether they are appropriate for young children being raised as Christians. Viewers had the nerve to contribute their own reviews, and how they felt about the movies. It's obviously a bunch of narrow-minded censoring bastards just trying to push the old crap about children being affected by what they see and hear. How can we tolerate this type of outrage? If advertisers are willing to support it, it must be good for all of us, and if anyone can't see that, they deserve our scorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 They gave the two films mentioned, Shark Tale and Shrek 4&1/2 stars out of 5, with their opinions about the morality of them and whether they are appropriate for young children being raised as Christians. Viewers had the nerve to contribute their own reviews, and how they felt about the movies. It's obviously a bunch of narrow-minded censoring bastards just trying to push the old crap about children being affected by what they see and hear. How can we tolerate this type of outrage? If advertisers are willing to support it, it must be good for all of us, and if anyone can't see that, they deserve our scorn. 132127[/snapback] Are you done? I am not sure what that rant is about, all I did was phrase what I thought was a simple question: Why don't they just not watch what they don't like? What is the goal of pressuring advertisers if not to keep whatever kind of entertainment they object to out of the market for everyone, even those who want to see it? I have no problem at all with these groups coming up with their own "reviews" for those interested to consult. Telling potential audiences that you saw the movie and for whatever reason think it stinks is a far cry from trying to scare the movie right off the screens from the git go. One lets those who want to see it to see it and those don't to not see it. The other takes that choice away from everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Are you done? I am not sure what that rant is about, all I did was phrase what I thought was a simple question: Why don't they just not watch what they don't like? What is the goal of pressuring advertisers if not to keep whatever kind of entertainment they object to out of the market for everyone, even those who want to see it? I have no problem at all with these groups coming up with their own "reviews" for those interested to consult. Telling potential audiences that you saw the movie and for whatever reason think it stinks is a far cry from trying to scare the movie right off the screens from the git go. One lets those who want to see it to see it and those don't to not see it. The other takes that choice away from everyone. 132401[/snapback] Scare the movie off the screens? Last time I checked, that has worked oh, NEVER. Normally quite the inverse. I don't see anything different from virtually any big dollar organized group. They have to use these tactics to be effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Are you done? I am not sure what that rant is about, all I did was phrase what I thought was a simple question: Why don't they just not watch what they don't like? What is the goal of pressuring advertisers if not to keep whatever kind of entertainment they object to out of the market for everyone, even those who want to see it? I have no problem at all with these groups coming up with their own "reviews" for those interested to consult. Telling potential audiences that you saw the movie and for whatever reason think it stinks is a far cry from trying to scare the movie right off the screens from the git go. One lets those who want to see it to see it and those don't to not see it. The other takes that choice away from everyone. 132401[/snapback] Your friends at PETA do it all the time with people who wear fur coats, only they use cans of paint and firebombs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 Your friends at PETA do it all the time with people who wear fur coats, only they use cans of paint and firebombs. 132604[/snapback] If you can find a single post from me ever on this board defending PETA or anyother animal rights organization for that matter, please do so, if not, please have the guts to admit that the "your friends at PETA" reference is bull stevestojan you made up with out the slightest idea as to whether it was truthful, fair or accurate. Are you defending what this group and PETA do, slamming both or applauding the tactic used by one group because you agree with their politics and slamming the other's use of the same tactic because you don't agree with theirs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Are you defending what this group and PETA do, slamming both or applauding the tactic used by one group because you agree with their politics and slamming the other's use of the same tactic because you don't agree with theirs? 132761[/snapback] Geez, Mick...does it even matter? No matter how you slice it, it's still baloney. Now go back to grilling veggie-burgers for you and your companion animal, you pleather-wearing extremist, you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wham Rocks Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 You're so right to ridicule them. I think my children need to see everything Hollywood makes and markets to them. 131506[/snapback] LOL! You busted me, I'm a covert Hollywood spy with an agenda to make parents take their kids to the movies that my fatcat cronies at DreamWorks produce. Of course you don't find the AFA's criticism outlandish, you're aptly titled CaWingNut. And that's cool, you're just another tomato can I'll get to kick around when I find more stories like this one. Which I eagerly anticipate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Of course you don't find the AFA's criticism outlandish, you're aptly titled CaWingNut. And that's cool, you're just another tomato can I'll get to kick around when I find more stories like this one. 133115[/snapback] Yeah, they gave Shark Tale 4&1/2 stars out of 5 - outlandish! Yes, the whole Shark Tale gay theme theory is bogeyman, fundraising type of nonsense. But if you look at the regular movie review section, they had a lot of good to say about that movie, and the reviews seem pretty well balanced. What I object to is your repeated attempts to stereotype all Christians with the most ridiculous, lunatic fringe-type stuff you can find. There's never a shortage of those types of things for any race, religion, etc. Wingnut refers to USAF duty. But personal insults is a great way to further discussion. If your definition of kicking someone around is stereotyping and ridiculing a religion, then I guess we can look forward to a lot more of this type of nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wham Rocks Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 Yeah, they gave Shark Tale 4&1/2 stars out of 5 - outlandish! Yes, the whole Shark Tale gay theme theory is bogeyman, fundraising type of nonsense. But if you look at the regular movie review section, they had a lot of good to say about that movie, and the reviews seem pretty well balanced. What I object to is your repeated attempts to stereotype all Christians with the most ridiculous, lunatic fringe-type stuff you can find. There's never a shortage of those types of things for any race, religion, etc. Wingnut refers to USAF duty. But personal insults is a great way to further discussion. If your definition of kicking someone around is stereotyping and ridiculing a religion, then I guess we can look forward to a lot more of this type of nonsense. 133218[/snapback] LOL, "you're attacking my faith!" 1) The AFA's whole "hidden gay agenda" article is funny because its outlandish. Oh no, Lenny shows vegetarian qualities! Next thing you know he'll be frequenting underwater gay bars. 2) I don't stereotype Christians, I stereotype religious fundamentalists. Search my previous posts about Islam if that tickles your fancy. 3) Its such a shame that specifically ridiculing the AFA is a personal attack on your religion. Because I coulda sworn Christians worshipped Christ, not the AFA. Next time I'll make fun of Jesus, as not to offend your new messiah, the AFA website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 At least movies are getting better than they used to be. Remember the one about the woman and her suspicious living arrangements with the seven midgets? That's what caused David Koresh and Charles Manson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 At least movies are getting better than they used to be. Remember the one about the woman and her suspicious living arrangements with the seven midgets? That's what caused David Koresh and Charles Manson. 134409[/snapback] I can't believe anyone actually made it through that horrible thing. That lowered the bar for suckitude at least a notch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 I can't believe anyone actually made it through that horrible thing. That lowered the bar for suckitude at least a notch. 134414[/snapback] they were among the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGTEleven Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 Why don't all you KzooMike stevestojan s just take your kids to see The Incredibles instead. It's a better movie and you won't even have to argue with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Boycott The Incredibles - it promotes overeating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 But personal insults is a great way to further discussion. If your definition of kicking someone around is stereotyping and ridiculing... Sounds like every other poster on PPP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 If you can find a single post from me ever on this board defending PETA or anyother animal rights organization for that matter, please do so, if not, please have the guts to admit that the "your friends at PETA" reference is bull stevestojan you made up with out the slightest idea as to whether it was truthful, fair or accurate. Are you defending what this group and PETA do, slamming both or applauding the tactic used by one group because you agree with their politics and slamming the other's use of the same tactic because you don't agree with theirs? 132761[/snapback] >crickets< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts