 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
Pastafarians...
Man gains the rights to wear spaghetti strainer on his head in driver license photo.
He claims it is religious headgear, and it is now recognized as such by Austrian authorities. Pastafarianism, I just learned, is a dogma-rejecting dogma that worships the Flying Spaghetti Monster (the deity of a branch of Atheists). Please, my fellow AMHDers who are Atheist (and anyone else who wants to comment), tell me that you find this to be as ridiculous and damaging to the logic-based and science-minded Atheist community as I do. Surely recognizing Pastafarianism as a national religion cannot lead to any good in the whole "Atheism isn't a religion" argument? I understand it's supposed to be a satire, or a mockery, of dogma-based religions. But what I see are fools making a mockery of themselves. Comments? (PS-I wanted to put this in member discussions, but the "Forum Community" is acting buggy and I can't select any categories because they won't populate... can someone place this in a discussion forum please?) |
||||
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree that imposing religion into legislation is dangerous, but I hardly agree that it is right or wise to fight fire with fire-as I would call this. For example, I protest homophobic laws that prohibit tax-paying, adult citizens (who happen to be gay) from gaining legal protections from the government as a united couple. I (or rather, those movers and shakers with whom I sympathize) don't try to manipulate the law in the same way the homophobes do, however. I wouldn't support a movement to illegalize other activities "dangerous" to the institution of marriage... say divorce, affairs or loveless marriage. That would be further restricting the rights of citizens and allowing legislation to spin out of control-inviting more ridiculous movements. Fighting for, and winning, the right to wear a spaghetti strainer in a government issued ID may have raised awareness (we'll see about that)... but until the movement makes any real strides to improve the real dangers of religious input on legislation, I will think the movement is irresponsible and misguided. I would like to know though what offends people about religious head gear in ID? Are women allowed to wear full Burqua in ID? As far as I know, the answer is no. Does any religious head gear obscure the face for identification purposes? I don't think religious people should have to take off their kippah or hijab or whatever else unless it obscures the face. No more than I think it's necessary for people to take off glasses or hats. But, then, I'm not a legislator or law enforcement professional. I'm merely someone who likes to see a little tolerance. |
||||
|
||||
 Originally Posted by Curlyben
|
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I'm just confused by the motives. Is it a joke? Is it trying to raise awareness? And my possibly (definitely) elementary skills of foresight see a group of people actually latching onto the FSM - maybe as a way to share Atheist ideas, maybe it turns into a brotherhood, a manipulative figurehead takes over, and then it turns into something totally out of control. 50 to 100 years down the road, people are associating FSM with this new dogma, and not a joke or parody intended to raise awareness. It's not like that hasn't happened before to things that were once well-guided and based in something reasonable. Look at what happened when Glenn Beck took over constitutionalism! I brought this up to my boyfriend last night and he is of the same opinion many people here at AMHD are. I think I just need to accept that this rubs me the wrong way (it just does, I can't help it!) but most people don't see it as a big deal. It happens and that's okay. Nada que hacer! |
||||
|
||||
|
What you described has happened to mostly all religious denominations. I really don't care if 200 new religions pop up... as long as they mean well as opposed to breeding terrorism and hatred. The FSM types are a pretty easy going bunch as evidenced by their "Eight I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" commandments:
The Eight I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts | The FSM Consortium |
||||
|
||||
|
And my possibly (definitely) elementary skills of foresight see a group of people actually latching onto the FSM - maybe as a way to share Atheist ideas, maybe it turns into a brotherhood, a manipulative figurehead takes over, and then it turns into something totally out of control. 50 to 100 years down the road, people are associating FSM with this new dogma, and not a joke or parody intended to raise awareness.
|
||||
|
||||
|
It takes more than half a decade to create dogmas, zealots, and violence. I have not once insulted Atheists, I'm expressing confusion at their motives right now and in this instance. My knowledge of crazy people in this world doesn't lead me to believe a recognized FSM religion will lead where Atheists that I know would want. Pope=began 30 AD (almost 2000 years ago) Spaghetti Monster=began 6 years ago Why bring up the pope? I hope it isn't in an effort to anger or otherwise upset me. I am not Catholic, nor do I follow any organized religion (now including Pastafarianism). If you think I don't understand the dangers in religion-especially those of antiquity-and their influences today, then you are very mistaken. I've already said, in several posts on this thread, what I feel about religious influence. It's something I agree with Atheists on, hence my confusion in this matter. |
||||
|
||||
|
Originally Posted by southamerica
|
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
View more questions Search
|
