Via John Cole, George Will gets this just right.
"March of the Penguins" raises this question: If an Intelligent Designer designed nature, why did it decide to make breeding so tedious for those penguins? The movie documents the 70-mile march of thousands of Antarctic penguins from the sea to an icy breeding place barren of nutrition. These perhaps intelligently but certainly oddly designed birds march because they cannot fly. They cannot even march well, being most at home in the sea[...]
The penguins' hardiness is remarkable, as is the intricate choreography of the march, the breeding and the nurturing. But the movie, vigorously anthropomorphizing the birds, invites us to find all this inexplicably amazing, even heroic. But the penguins are made for that behavior in that place. What made them? Adaptive evolution. They have been "designed" for all that rigor — meaning they have been shaped by adapting to many millennia of nature's harshness.
"Tedious" isn't the right word for the forced march an abusive Mother Nature requires of Emperor Penguins. "Brutal", "sadistic", or "excruciating" all fit much better. If everyone in America saw that film, the problem wouldn't be belief in intelligent design, it'd be a wave of spiritual crises sweeping across the "Heartland". God may have a plan, but watching those penguins, the blueprints look suspiciously like what the scary neighborhood kid used to do with a magnifying glass and salt.
While you're at John's place, check out his post on Haley Barbour. I don't know what exactly would make Mississippi's governor encourage "ruthlessness" in national guardsmen, but it really seems like the first step en route to catastrophe.