Slashdot Mirror
Pastafarian Wins Right To Wear Colander In License Photo
gregmon writes "An Austrian follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has finally won the right to don the religious headgear of his choosing (a spaghetti strainer) in his driving license photo. After a three year battle with the un-enlightened Austrian authorities, Niko Aim can now wear his colander in all official photos."
THIS is news for nerds!
That must be some heretical Pastafarian sect. Traditional Pastafarians wear pirate hats, not strainers.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ln83rsJ8lX1qjh397.gif
and *then* wins right to headgear in licensephoto.
God Bless.
Or Flying Spaghetti Monster bless - or whatever they do. Maybe toss him an extra garlic bread or something.
That's using his noodle.
If Muslims and Jews can get away with cutting up the genitalia of their completely healthy sons, why can't anybody wear the most preposterous adornments for a license photo?
I think austrian emacs-loving-geeks should wear the religious headgear of the church of emacs. http://stallman.org/saintignucius.jpg
It even has a saint.
(I won't, I am neither austrian, nor a believer of the church of emacs. I go to the temple of 'vi')
Wake me up when governments stop requiring "official photos", or licenses to drive for that matter.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Authorities say that he did not pick up his license for full 2 years and that the unusual hat has nothing to do with rules for any religious exceptions to *passport photo rules* because it is a drivers license. The law for driver licenses only specifies that the face in its entirety has to visible (spelling that out a bit more, but I did not read the rules myself). This also means that the conclusion "in all official photos" is not quite correct. If he would apply for a passport authorities would have to conduct an in-depth review... The question remains why it took one year for the license.
Seriously, this is so wrong.
This is the opposite effect of what should be happening.
This is insane.
Religions shouldn't get special treatment, it's moronic.
Anyone who defines their personality by the mockery of others is a complete and irredeemable asshole. I don't care how superior it makes you feel. It's stupid and childish, and frankly is harmful to society. Atheists seem to revel in trolling religious people. Those people, who ordinarily would keep their faith to themselves, get pissed off at the trolls and fight back. Next thing you know, we can't get through a winter without this ridiculous "war on christmas" talk all over the place. We get assholes on the one side demanding to teach creationism in schools, while assholes on the other side demand that we tear down old memorials because they have religious meanings.
I know you atheists love the smug feeling of being smarter than everyone else, so please... put that massive brainpower to good use, and figure out that you aren't helping things. All this mockery just adds fuel to the fire. Live and let live. It's not hard.
Cue a million posts by smarmy fuckers about how religion is the only thing harming society, and if we could just make one more smug internet post about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, it would all go away!
With all the shit talking that goes on about the bitcoin stories around here, where's the outrage over this story? This is barely idle-worthy.
I am from Austria, and have followed the news here. Yesterday it came out that the story is a bit different...
He waited for three years for his drivers license, but only because he didn't know that he had to check himself if it was ready. It was waiting for him since two years... (btw, Vienna has an excellent public traffic. If you live here, you really don't need a car!)
Further: the requirements for a driver license picture are a bit different than for a pass. The only requirement is that the face should be visible and recognizable. Headdress is not important. In pass photos, no headdress is allowed, only if it is 'medically needed (?) or religious headdress.
So, he Nico Alm (not Aim) and the holy FSM got their 15 minutes of fame here, nothing more.
I was going to say that this just demonstrates how crazy religion is. But then I realized that Scientology already did that decades ago. I can only wait until Pastafarianism holds the same position in society that Scientology does now.
dom
...that furry doesn't constitute a religion.
s/Niko Aim/Niko Alm/
Un-enlightened Austrian authorities? No. I don't think so.
Anyone who refer to deities in their regular life, like Niko Aim, is un-enlightened.
That those Austrian authorities gave in to this makes me sad.
Slashdot !== Reddit.
Sigh.
Hey, if he wants to do something ridiculous like that, so be it. I can't think of a more fitting punishment than that he'd be stuck with that image on his drivers license. Be careful what you wish for, you may just get it..
welcome to: ------- http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time. 3 free shipping competitive price any size available accept the paypal exquisite watches 75$ 90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42 $$$$$$$ jordan shoes $ 32 nike shox $ 32 Christan Audigier bikini $ 23 Ed Hardy Bikini $ 23 Sm ful short_t-shirt_woman $ 15 ed hardy short_tank_woman $ 16 Sandal $ 32 christian louboutin $ 80 Sunglass $ 15 welcome to: ------- http://www.betterwholesaler.us/ COACH_Necklace $ 27 handbag $ 33 AF tank woman $ 17 puma slipper woman $ 30 discount evisu jeans wholesale LV handbags discount coach handbags Believe you will love it. welcome to: ------ O(_)O
This is an interesting read (the comments that is :D)
-- J.
They force their faith on other people, namely and most often, on their own kids. That's why "would keep their faith to themselves" is bullshit.
When religious fucks truly keep their faith to themselves, not pushing it onto even their own offspring, then I can sympathize. Not before.
Austrian regulations for drivers license pictures state that they have to have a specified size and that the whole head has to be visible. There is no constraint that you cannot wear something on your head! Austrian police released a statement, that they do not care about that and granted it because it is within normal specifications. Also, there was no "three year battle" at all. The guy applied for a license(Note: he specified that he did not want to be notified(!)) and the license was granted. End of story. Since the guy had specified that he wanted to take care himself and check for completion of the request himself(!), the license was simply waiting for him for more than two years. http://derstandard.at/1310511140592/Fuehrerschein-Nudelsieb-doch-nicht-aus-religioesen-Gruenden-genehmigt
You go Niko!
Now, if we can just get that show on our local stage sometime...
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
No-one else think that not only did he waste 3 years of his life but also waste a lot of tax payer money as well?
He needs psychiatric help.
Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
A collander is as much as a holy relic as is a sacred plowshare or remnants of the cross; when you submit these vestments to the supreme being for his blessing in their daily use, you cary the holy conviction and reasonable fortitude to remember the blessing of the only God in your use of it.
God bless atheists too.
In a society which has rules which must be obeyed, err, except that not everybody has to obey them if they claim to belong to a religion which forbids it, we really need people like him to highlight the absurdity of the procedure.
We should either require compliance or not. This absurd half way house where most of us have to comply but some of us don't is divisive and pointless.
Meanwhile, people are starving the world over while this guy apparently, according to the article, is fighting for the Austrian government to legally recognize a religion that started as a joke. Glad he's fighting for the rights of people who really aren't discriminated against in today's society instead of actually helping people.
I'm austrian and I followed the story for a while now. The story is funny but by far not as dramatic as it seems. First of all, those headgear regulations are only valid for passport fotos, not driving license fotos. The driving license was issued in 2009 and was ready to retrieve. It just took Niko 2 years to realise that since nobody told him. It's not a big problem to get a driving license with a funny picture in austria. nevertheless a funny story.
Religions are for dumb people who dont know how to lead their lives. In today's world we dont need any religion to tell us to be good humans. Religions are anti- nature and wildlife.....
Shouldn't this be a requirement for followers of all religions?
There was a brochure issued by the DMV that said that you only may wear headgear for religious reasons on the photo. That was the initial trigger why @NikoAlm started the whole thing. The law regarding driving licenses says nothing about religion, only that the head must be "fully visible", but that came up only recently.
The clerk at the DMV initially refused to issue the driving license, asking for a photo without headgear. When Mr. Alm asked to get that in writing, the DMV issued a (kind of) subpoena instead and had Mr. Alm examined by a medical officer regarding his mental health. Luckily the examination only took 5 minutes and Mr. Alm now has it in writing that he is mentally sane and fit to drive a vehicle.
The DMV then issued the driving license after about a year but did not contact Mr. Alm so that he could pick it up, that's where the long delay came from.
That's the whole story as told at http://blog.alm.at/2011/07/12/hl-fuhrerschein-episode-6-das-finale/ (translation: http://goo.gl/MOsG1)
Yes, it is only a moral victory. For a real victory, somebody would have to do that with a passport photo where headgear really is only allowed for religious reasons. But hey, given the even international publicity, somebody might... :-)
> Yes atheists are assholes but, bright side, there are no atheism-motivated wars or ethnic cleansings.
Are you new atheist or old school?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
He didn't waste 3 years. He invested nearly nothing that would exceed the costs of a "normal" driving license, he even only borrowed the colander. And it cost him lets say one hour or two extra due to the medical examination and the paperwork.
And he did not waste tax-payers money, the DMV did it by not recognizing his religious rights in the first place...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I didn't even notice the dude was Austrian until I was like why is his license in some weird non-English language? I think i'm becoming way too dependent on coffee to function.
The initial reason why Mr. Alm started the whole thing was a brochure issued by the Austrian DMV that stated that headgear on the photo was only allowed for religious reasons. Now would you doubt the legality of an oficially-issued prochure?
Yes, it only took about one year due to the DMV requesting the mental examination. Yes, Mr. Alm did not pick up the driving license, but the DMV did not send him notification that he may pick up his drivers license as they usually do when a driving license isn't picked up.
I am a transplanted Canadian living in Austria. My wife has known Niko for many years. What he is doing is bringing light to the issue of separation of religion and state, and the removal of power by majority or minority religions on society. He is not some serious Pastifarian, please do not belittle a reasonable and intelligent fight with humour not guns against the power of religion to dictate the abilities of a person in a society. I also suppose some people that think this is stupid would think putting cross-hairs on an political opponent on their website is ok... and the resulting outcome not their fault.
Niko is bringing to light the issue of religious rights. He is not for religion. One has to understand the Austrian history a bit, and current situation here to get why he is doing this. On one hand you have a 74% Catholic majority of the population, a large noticable immigration of Islamic persons, and even if they are not the largest immigrating sector (Eastern block is) they are the most culturally different and integration is not an option of choice for many, whether it be language, religion, or culture. The common Austrian greeting on the street is "Gruess Gott", meaning "Greet God".....not exactly bipartisan. In schools there are still crosses in classrooms, something else he is fighting to have removed. Most (if not all) legislated holidays allowed by the government are only Catholic in nature. Added to this, historically Austria has been overtaken through history by various cultures and empires, since Roman times.... whether it be eastern based or western European civilizations. Out of this there is a rooted feeling of protectionism in "Austrian" even if that is a mix of those ruling cultures over time. One only has to look at the last election here where the FPÖ, the right wing party won 27% support, one campaign slogan was "Foreign blood is not good for Austria" (how scary is that!) There is a trend in Europe of right wing protectionist parties gaining in strength right now, with Holland being a good example of this as well. So there are many parts of society that may be railing against the Burka to support what may appear "Church out of State issues", but are really it is protectionist based. The Burka has become the lighting rod for this state vs religion and culture issue. Hence his use of a colandar in a photo, not a burka. One only has to look to France that has outlawed the wearing of the Burka and now Belgium as well to see how this issue of religious rights protectionism is being polarized in Europe. He is not pandering to the majority religion side, or part of it, quite the contrary. Austria is taking a more cautious approach, and bending in some ways, and not in others.
Canadians have dealt with these issue for many years, as crosses in classes have not existed since 1896 in British Columbia. And close to that time in other provinces, as it is controlled at a provincial level. Also on the issue of religion Canada has had to deal with 10 year old children wearing Kirpans to school(Religious dagger) to school. Regarding national identity, the RCMP has had to allow people to wear turbans as part of their official dress. With culture and religion, one only has to look at the divide that raises and falls with the French/English relationship inside of Canada. Canada is mulit-cultural, America is a melting pot, Austria I would say is "tolerant through the lessons of the past", and cautious on how to change. Niko is one of the few voices of the "new social leaders" in Austria that is trying to bring light to these issues and do it in a way that is not too confrontational, yet gets people talking and the issue being addressed by the government. These are not easy topics within Austrian society or at a governmental level here.
For me Austria is a very cautious nation aware of the mistakes and lessons of the past. But with such a large religious majority it is hard for the government to not take the side in protecting the rights of Christians as a majority politically. Niko is trying to point out that democracy of society is without religion, not religious majorities ruling when it comes to rights of a society. Not something easily dealt with for any society.
Good work Niko!
Do you enjoy the tactile feedback that your finger tips provide? A super nerve dense area of skin that allows your hands to do delicate stuff. Imagine if as a baby someone came along and shaved off all of your finger tips. Do you think you'd be able to do the types of work that an 'un shaved' would be able to do? You wouldn't know any different. As far as you know that's how fingers are supposed to work.
"Ribbed for her Pleasure" condoms. Where the heck do you think 'rib' was supposed to come from? Prosthetics are nice but not quite the same.
You're not asked to wear the same jumper nor are you asked to keep your hairstyle the same, your St Christopher isn't an issue either. Neither are you required to put the same make-up on. So why would you have to wear your Holy Hat?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL7FcvEydqg
I for one welcome our noodly overload.
+{:^=(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1DVWX96PNg
Ya oi wirl movah to OWSTREEYA! Ahn becowm a PAGHSTAFARIAGGGGHHHN!!!
David Reimer, was not perfectly healthy, he had phimosis. This can cause problems with infection. So he was not given a ritual circumcision including the USA cultural Circumcision. Also it was performed using cauterization unlike 99% of circumcisions, I hope that doctor lost a good lawsuit. I mean if the foreskin is stuck to the penis why would you think you could burn it off without affecting covered head.
Of course I am not to talk since I am not circumcised due to having to European parents.
Seriously, all you Pastas out there just need to grow up. You're doing more harm than good to your cause.
As an aside, Atheism is just as scientifically indefensible as any classic theism. Agnosticism is the only actual scientific viewpoint (sorry if that hurts your feelings, but it's true. Please stop trying to use science to justify what's just a typical generation rebellion).
Actually, I think they probably would do a psychiatric evaluation on anyone who attempted to wear a mutilated penis on their head in an Australian driving licence photo.
An Austrian photo, on the other hand, may be more likely to show a cap with a reservoir tip if this article is any indication.
...mock-religions.
Which is... wait for it... to mock religions. ReligionS. As in plural.
Not "one sect's beliefs". That would be religious bullying, which is the first cousin (on its mother's side) of religious persecution.
Besides. Every religion out there already has its own methods and channels for that particular activity, on sect by sect basis.
Mostly based around claims that everyone else who is NOT a member of their sect is going straight to hell.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The article calls him "A self-confessed atheist".
Doesn't confessing imply an admission of guilt? That doesn't seem necessary.
Also, what's the difference between "self-confessed" and "confessed"?
Pastafarianism [...] came into being during the "teach the controversy" creationism period in the US, to demand that its own creation myth be included in official curricula, if other people's were
If I were designing the curriculum, science books would have history sections explaining what people believed before the current models arose. For example, a book about chemistry might open with a progression from continuous matter to indivisible atoms to plum-pudding to Bohr orbits to quantum wave models of the atom. Likewise, the chapter on the big bang in an earth science textbook would list the creation myths of the most famous religions.
I see faith as not unlike Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems. Both show that there exist truths within a system of things that cannot be proved within the system.
How many schools and hospitals would not have been built if it weren't for Christians?
I can't believe all of this talk of false religions. Everyone KNOWS the universe was sneezed out of the nose of The Great Green Arkleseizure. Ye shall all fear The Coming of the Great White Handkerchief!
No, it just means that, like many others, you're the kind of smooth-brain cretin who can't distinguish between the negative right for yourself to be whatever religion you wish, and the imaginary right -- or, shall I say, entitlement delusion -- to try to shove it down everyone's throat.
If that still confuses you, here's a useful analogy: sex is also mostly free, but that doesn't give you a right to knock on everyone's door once a week and harass them with repeated requests to accept your dick. What you do between consenting adults is one thing -- for sex or religion alike -- and we won't stop you, but if you mistake that for some "right" to harass others then you're just an antisocial idiot.
Still, maybe singling out JWs was narrowing it too much. I'd phrase it more like "if you're the kind of frakking moron who thinks that 'freedom of religion' means an entitlement to try to shove your delusions down others' throat, GET OFF MY LAWN!"
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I suppose that within a few years, Pastafarianism, or the Church of the FSM, will gain earnest followers whose number will eventually overwhelm the ironic followers. Another ironic religion will need to be established, and fought for, to demonstrate how ridiculous the idea of a Flying Spaghetti Monster really is. The true believers will always chase out the ironic founders. This is what happened with Scientology, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. They all started out as jokes or games, and soon became deadly serious. The Church of the FSM thinks it's so clever, but it's just giving the Ouroboros of credulity more tail to devour. Or something like that.
--I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
-- See?
I don't know if it matters but I do think there is one glaring difference between what this guy is doing and what all of the favorite targets of Slashdotters are doing. That is, the believers of real religious faiths actually do believe in what they're doing, even the apparel they wear as part of their worship. Does anybody truly believe this guy believes in a spaghetti god or any supernatural reason to wear a spaghetti strainer on his head?
If he doesn't, and the only reason he's wearing this thing is to make a political statement, then he shouldn't be compared to any member of a real religious faith. Instead, maybe he should be compared to PETA people who put on animal makeup and get photographed naked in cages to protest animal abuse. They're doing something outrageous to draw attention to a cause they believe in.
Maybe he shouldn't even be compared to them. Maybe he's more like Howard Stern, just doing whatever he can to get attention. But I certainly don't believe he's fighting for religious freedom, which is what he claims to be fighting for. In fact, if his goal is to mock people who are allowed to practice their religious beliefs then he's actually fighting to take away religious freedom.
I'm not saying what he's doing is bad or wrong. I'm just saying there is a difference between fighting for what you believe in and fighting against what other people believe in. I have issues with a lot of people who claim to be Jewish and people who claim to be Christian. But what they wear on their head isn't one of those issues. And I wouldn't have a problem with this guy wearing a spaghetti strainer on his head, except for the fact that the only reason he's doing it is to insult people who believe in things he doesn't believe in. I can understand him being upset if the person believes in something that hurts him. But what they wear on their head doesn't hurt him.
Pastafarianism, Scientology, The Church Of The Subgenius, and I'm sure others were all originally pretend religions.
Once they got large enough it was practically inevitable that someone would take them seriously.
In the case of Scientology, it didn't help that the person who invented it intended for people to take it seriously (from my understanding, there was a bet involved).
Heck, I bet there are even people who seriously believe the fake spoofs of Scientology.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Though I suppose they will for your passport if the TSA has their way...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
If I had mod points I'd have used 'em
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
... herein lie the seeds of pastafarian jihad.
The argument is simple: Yes, it is less traumatic as a child, but the child also cannot give consent. Maybe the child will grow up to think it's normal. Maybe they'll grow up to think they've been mutilated.
In either case, it seems important to me that before removing a part of your body, you should have some say.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Sometimes "treat others as you would want to be treated" can be open to interpretation. Suppose you where doing something, that without your knowledge, would condemn you to hell -- like wearing shorts. Wouldn't you want someone to notify you of this horrible transgression so that you can fix it and go to heaven?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The reason that Muslims and other religious people are allowed to wear head cover in driver license photographs and other situations where hats would normally not be allowed is because they have a religious belief that their heads should always be covered in public. Thus there is no way for them to comply with both their religion and the government rule that hats should not be worn.
If rarely wear the holy hat anyway, then you shouldn't have any problem not wearing it to have your photograph taken, or to enter government buildings etc.
Sometimes "treat others as you would want to be treated" can be open to interpretation.
I prefer STP treatment, less engine wear, better gas mileage.
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
Bullshit.
"Goedel's theorems" and "faith" are nothing alike: one is a mathematical formal construct, the other is an excuse not to think about things. Trying to conflate the two is misguided or just dumb.
Goedel didn't say that "arithmetic" requires "faith". It is obvious (to anyone alive) that arithmetic is a useful symbolic construct that "works" (no faith required there). Goedel just made a "small" claim regarding a specific subset of formal languages (recursively generated theories). Furthermore, he only claimed that a consistent theory could not prove itself true: he said nothing about using another (possible consistent) theory to prove the first one.
More importantly, Goedel's claims are simply within the world of "formal languages" and not within the whole world of epistemology. Since the universe is not reductible/homeomorphic to "arithmetic" or any other equivalent formal construct, you can't really formally prove most things about the universe anyway.
Evolution/"modern synthesis theory" (as an example) cannot be formally proven, but there is overwhelming evidence that it is a good model, as you can generate useful predictions with it, so people assume it's mostly/probably true. On the other hand, you cannot formally prove it's true.
Can you formally prove to me that the Earth goes around the Sun and not the other way around? No. Why? Because you can create a valid model that assumes that the Earth is the center of the solar system and accurately describes the movement of all planets (it would just be much more complicated that a model that assumes that the center of the solar system is the Sun).
So... as you can see... "truth" almost ALWAYS cannot be formally proven (outside of the world of arithmetic and formal systems), even for very evident stuff (e.g. heliocentrism vs geocentrism). Even worse: "truth", outside of formal systems, is mostly undefined anyway.
Science solves this by postulating that the "simplest" model that explains the "most" is the one that's "likely to be true" (for correct values of "simplest" and "most"). Science _never_ assumes that anything is 100% proven true, outside the world of formalisms (math).
Faith/religion is the antithesis of this: it involves choosing an arbitrary explanation/model and just sticking to it, regardless of its merits/complexity/explanatory power of said model.
Apples and oranges.
tl;dr: blindly trying to extend Goedel's theorems to non-formal systems in order to imply that arithmetic (or anything else) requires "faith" makes it sound like you didn't understand said theorems.
PS: *sigh* Slashdot... you really need to get your Unicode support working, one of these days...
[Gödel] only claimed that a consistent theory could not prove itself true: he said nothing about using another (possible consistent) theory to prove the first one.
True, you need another, broader system of things to prove a given system of things. But as I understand it, at some point, you run out of consistent theories that you can comprehend, and you have to have faith that the theories that you do understand are consistent.
the universe is not reductible/homeomorphic to "arithmetic" or any other equivalent formal construct
Some people disagree with that. See digital physics and "it from bit".
Faith/religion is the antithesis of this: it involves choosing an arbitrary explanation/model and just sticking to it, regardless of its merits/complexity/explanatory power of said model.
Don't immediately discount the explanatory power of scientific passages in the Bible. The Bible says the earth is round (Proverbs 8:27, Isaiah 40:22); science later discovered the same. The Bible says the earth "hangs on nothing" as opposed to turtles all the way down (Job 26:7); science later discovered the same. The Bible tells how the water cycle works (Job 36:27-28, Ecclesiastes 1:6-7); Marcus Vitruvius later discovered the same. The Bible says the stars are beyond human capacity to count (Genesis 15:5; Jeremiah 33:22); astronomers up through Johannes Kepler consistently underestimated this. And the hygiene rules of the Jews were darn good at preserving their health. But I agree with you that various religious organizations' handwaving interpretations of holy texts, that is, "this is literal but that is symbolic", isn't rigorous enough to be worth much.
Apples and oranges.
Are both delicious fruits.
*sigh* Slashdot... you really need to get your Unicode support working
Slashdot's Unicode support used to work until people started abusing it with bidirectionality control characters to screw up the layout of other comments on a page. Is it a coincidence that bidirectionality is used mostly by the languages spoken in the holy lands of the major monotheistic faiths?
I usually don't trust oil additives, but while looking up STP treatment, I noticed their smoke treatment. That may work very well in my oil burning 77 chevy pickup.
Suppose you where doing something, that without your knowledge, would condemn you to hell -- like wearing shorts.
Not possible; a Christian's sins are forgiven. The only unforgivable sin is worshiping a different god or gods (like money, for example).
In that hypothetical case yes, I'd want to be told, but not in a hateful, accusatory tone. Screaming "YOU'RE GOING TO BURN IN HELL" is most decidedly not Christian behavior.
Free Martian Whores!
Sadly... There's NOTHING in the Bible that would lead anyone to think that you're going to Hell because you're wearing shorts- save that maybe they feel that it's "seductive". They didn't say that, only that she was risking her immortal soul to wearing shorts. I suggest that those folks quit speaking of the splinter in their brother's eye and pluck out the plank in theirs first- they're not following what he taught by doing it the way they did it, regardless of the thinking you're talking to.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"Clearly some sort of Eastern/Byzantine Orthodox Pastafarian."
I believe you are mistaken. The article specifically mentions that his religious headgear was "unorthodox".
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
Wouldn't you want someone to notify you of this horrible transgression so that you can fix it and go to heaven?
I see that exact rationale used all the time. It makes me sad.
Does anybody truly believe this guy believes in a spaghetti god or any supernatural reason to wear a spaghetti strainer on his head?.
He may not, but sometime somewhere someone will. There is a slippery slope from playing at a religion to believing it. You find yourself saying "may the noodly appendage bless me" when nobody is there. Then you start to feel that perhaps if you don't ask for the FSMs blessing things won't go well - nothing supernatural but its some psychological preparation.
Then you start to have ridiculous thoughts that perhaps there is some supernatural being, who has chosen to make himself known to you as the FSM. My friend told me this anyway, and said that at this point he stopped it all just in case he ended up not knowing that the thoughts are ridiculous.
He believes in his followers putting utilitarianism above all else, so a colander on the allows his followers to always be ready when in need of straining spaghetti - name one other religion that makes as much sense... :)
cool - Tell you wife's friend, "Nicely done!" :-)
Religion requires faith, in the sense that there is something which cannot be proven and hence we'd either have to believe it or not. The problem I have with it is that you don't need religion at all for it. Yes, there are things we cannot prove, some have not been discovered yet, some will probably never be discovered. But where does religion come in? No matter what miracle you present me that "proves" God's existence, I will show you an equally likely event that doesn't need a god. Creation of humankind? Some alien did it. Creation of the universe? A botched experiment of some extra-universal scientists. Miracle cure? Statistics and selective perception. Jesus' ascent to the heavens? Provided it happened at all, Jesus was an alien and was taken back by his mothership.
Yes, I cannot prove any of those. How could I? There is no trace, no evidence, for any of those "theories" (I use the term as loosely here as it is used by the theological "scientists"). And yet it is as likely as God's intervention because there is equally much evidence. That's the problem I have with religion. You can easily take God out of the equation or simply replace him with something equally outlandish or even more rational without worsening the likelihood.
But, and that may surprise you, I have no beef with people who want to believe in Jesus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Eris (hail Eris, full of mischief!). As long as they don't try to push their illusions into the realm of real science.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
google images "penal scrotal webbing"
I did as you said, and googled for it (including the quotes), and it just returns one image - the Austrian Pastafarian driver's license.
Way to go. How you found out he not only has the thing on his head but also what his scrotum looks like AND feed it all to Google is beyond my imagination. You sure are one of those brilliant LULZSEC hax0rs. ^^
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my hard disk?
I'm feeling compelled to see how far I can get with getting pastafirism or even kopimism recognized as a religion in my country. I hope others are under this compulsion too and this turns into a worldwide thing. That would be quite funny and hopefully an eyeopener to some people :)
Creation of the universe? A botched experiment of some extra-universal scientists.
If the extra-universal scientist's name happens to be Jehovah, this is not unlike what I believe. An alien who goes by Satan has been botching the experiment for the past few millennia, and it has been revealed how he will handle this: once Satan finishes iterating through every possible botch all the way up to World War V, Jehovah will put Satan on death row for 1000 years to show how it should have been done.
You can easily take God out of the equation or simply replace him with something equally outlandish or even more rational without worsening the likelihood.
I'm sort of seeing what you mean: any religious belief is isomorphic to science fiction.
that they wasted tax payer money fighting this is just sad.
Religions mock themselves well enough without our help.
...Nazis will eventually die from old age well enough, without our help.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Especially when it's sufficient to say "I don't believe".
Pastafarians, Jedi etc. are ANTI-theists.
"I don't believe" is not enough when you actually want to take an active stand AGAINST the waste of humanity's money, time and other resources, exploiting of the gullible and promotion of hate and alienation and other fun activities organized religions have been into since the first manlike creature decided to worship the first piece of rock that looked interesting to him.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I wasn't arguing against any points you made. If you actually made some.
I'm not really sure what you were trying to say, your sentence structure being rather incoherent there.
I was simply informing you that those are not atheists but ANTItheists.
Cause the difference is rather huge. I.e. like between agnostics and atheists.
Or agnostics and Major ReligionTM on the other side of the scale.
How can I be putting up a strawman argument if I'm not arguing any points you made?
Or did you confuse my explanation of antitheist motives with me arguing against some point you made?
I mean, I know that most people come here expecting an argument (or abuse) but some comments ARE just attempts at being informative.
I mean, there's even a moderation option recognizing exactly that.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Everybody has a right to ask people to discuss their beliefs. It is part of the Christian faith to go preaching to the people.
All the householder has to do is say "no thank you".
That's it!
Jehovah's Witnesses do not "try to shove it down everyone's throat" as you seem to suggest. They are very polite and if you say you are not interested then they will go away.
What is wrong with people today that they can't be civil simply because you don't like what they believe?