- cross-posted to:
- pastafarianism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- pastafarianism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
You must log in or register to comment.
Back The Satanic Temple instead, they’re still an organization and have a better track record of legally fighting for the separation of Church and State
i think both are helpful:
the satanic temple is great to actually fight, but certainly gives people a visceral reaction (that’s the whole point: it’s intentionally incredibly offensive only to people fighting for religion)
sometimes it’s useful to fight not with a visceral anti-X reaction, but an obvious parody
both are reducto ad absurdium: 1 is “offensive” and the other is humorous
I got very excited by the Satanic Temple when I learned some of the things they were doing to fight this sort of thing. Then I did some research and got disappointed at the infighting.
I am afraid that this could have a non ironic following in the USA.
Get a few celebrities on board and some mansion in LA.
There are people who take it seriously. The nature pastafarianism’s (not sure if thats right) religious doctrine lends it to being more chill vibes than anything else though. Still can be a bit of a social barrier when trying to interact with practitioners. However, that’s not unique to pastafarianism. Most atypical social clubs have that barrier.
The gospel is just: “don’t take religious text literally” everything else is just for fun and jokes. There are extremely few people who are serious about it, my brother. I’ve never met one and I’ve been a pastafarian minister for like 12 years
Right well I couldn’t really ask for a better demonstration
i don’t think you really understand the point…
to make the argument that religion should be free, it needs to have everything a “real” religion does
i’m not sure that anyone is performing marriages as a minister of FSM in a way that anyone involved actually believes that god is a flying spaghetti monster… the point is to make a point that if you can claim christian, muslim, hindu, etc religious things apply without proof then you can claim anything applies without proof
its about making an obvious farce of something that’s farcical… it’s not as effective if you don’t look like the thing you’re trying to say is farcical, because then people can easily subvert the discussion with irrelevant things because it’s “obviously not the same”
it’s only a social barrier if you think religion isn’t somewhat farcical and take offence to that opinion… in which case, well, you and pastafarians were never going to get along
I think we are talking of different levels of seriousness.
I feel like AI FSM artwork is an untapped market.
AI is evil
But it’s also really good at drawing spaghetti.
I’m ordained in the The Church of the FSM. Time to get to work.
Pastafarianism! I’ve performed 5 weddings in his name 😁 not to mention my own is touched by his noodly appendage every day
No way! I love the card saying we are explicitly allowed to perform marriages. We’re as legit as any other ordained minister!
Heeeeeeell yee boi. You got a colander on your head in your driver’s license photo? That is legal too! I Love taking moral stories from religious text but never taking the texts themselves in the literal sense!
Thinking about a colander for my passport photo. I need to man up and do it.
Sorry, I already am a member of the world’s one TRUE fake religion, The Church of the SubGenius, and also a member of the world’s fastest growing snack religion, The First Church of The Last Laugh.
Fuck Reddit and Fuck Spez.
Nonsense to combat nonsense? Idk about this one, chief, it feels like the result of frustration over intellectual difficulties.
The point is that with a group bringing organized religion into secular public places, their intent is to impose their world view on others, without the rigor that secular policy demands.
Because they do not do this with good faith arguments (pun very intended) their opposition is under no obligation to do so either. Thus you get absurd responses like the FSM and Dudeism, meant to ridicule the people trying to force their beliefs on others with no consideration of any pre-existing ones the people in that society already have.
This is right, it started as a letter to a school board who was going to enact religious education in a public school. Obviously intended to teach Christianity, the original author of the letter was absurdly excited to come and teach the children about the flying spaghetti monster.
and same with the satanic temple!
they’re both reducto ad absurdum used in different ways: FSM is meant to give people a laugh in 3rd parties (and to waste time so it’s untenable to continue with religious propaganda), satanic temple is meant to cause offence (… in a good way… in the way that forced religion is offensive and this points that out)
