Should pastafarians have religious rights?

One of the main arguments against that is that it's not a real religion, but a parody of religions. However, Bobby Henderson, the famous prophet of pastafarianism, claims that that religion has existed in secrecy for hundreds of years before it came into mainstream. For all we know, that could be true. And, since there are vegetarian spaghetti, I have nothing against people becoming pastafarians. So, what do you think?

Vegetarian Pastafarians are heretical and an abomination in the noodles of the LOrd. They should be treated accordingly.

Their beliefs are no more or less absurd than those of any other religion. So whatever.

Papa Yaakoff in 3... 2... 1...

I think it's less absurd than Christianity because, since all the living creatures desire food, it makes sense that God, if he exists, is actually food, right? Plus, their main prophet is a physicist.

God is a tasty cookie. Yum. Now pass the rum.

Should ANYONE have religious rights? It depends on what you are willing to define as "religion". Insofar as Scientology is called a religion, Pastafarianism is no less so in my mind. Stupid? Yes. Worse than L. Wrong Hubbard? Hardly.

Of course, notice, this shit only comes up in fucked up countries like the United States, naturally. Only in America are people truly retarded enough to give thought to inane garbage on this level.

Should "Intelligent Design" be taught in school? First question: when you say, "ID" what the Hell do you mean by that?

What seems logical to me is to teach what science can currently explain, viz, that mankind is the highest of all the primates, and that we and other primates such as the Apes, the Orangutans, certainly the Chimpanzees, and especially hominids such as australopithecines and other members of family Homo had a common ancestor or ancestors plural along the way, most likely the latter.

As for whether a Deity or Deities plural had a hand in that process in some way, shape, form, or fashion, that is up to the person's individual belief structure. Certainly very possible, and in my mind highly likely. That's it. That's all.

Say anything more about G-d, and you start trampling on people's rights to believe what they choose and teach their children accordingly.

Three things not to be discussed in the classroom: sex, religion, and politics. Keep your G-d, your presidential favourite, and your dick out of my kid's education, thank you please!

I certainly think one should have sex ed and civics courses. But that is different then what I mean by the above. I even think one could study religion from a purely social and historical perspective and learn quite a bit.

But I think you all get my drift. Teach the science, make sure to mention that yes, a Deity or Deities plural could have been behind it or not as the case may be, and move on. Next please!

Papa Yaakoff in 3... 2... 1...

Let me show you the difference between myself & you hive-mind autists:

What seems logical to me is to teach what science can currently explain, viz, that mankind is the highest of all the primates, and that we and other primates such as the Apes, the Orangutans, certainly the Chimpanzees, and especially hominids such as australopithecines and other members of family Homo had a common ancestor or ancestors plural along the way, most likely the latter.

I strongly disagree; Evolution has no scientific evidence to support it & is the most dangerous of all the science-frauds ever perpetrated on mankind...

Even worse than Heliocentrism, in fact.

Three things not to be discussed in the classroom: sex, religion, and politics. Keep your G-d, your presidential favourite, and your dick out of my kid's education, thank you please!

I strongly agree; the sexualisation of children is another great monstrosity of our age.

Now; note how I am capable of both strongly agreeing & disagreeing with the same person, without having to insult him & whilst still respecting him as a human.

This is because Yaakov has shown himself to be an honest, thoughtful & independent person...

A thing you & your ilk have not.

I know you are incapable of comprehending this, due to your massive brain-damage & crippling emotional immaturity...

But it's true.

Pastafarians have the right to worship, just like everyone else... but I think what you're really asking about is should they be recognized as a religion by the state. I agree with Yaakov on this one. If Scientology can be deemed a legitimate religion by the US government, then so should Pastafarianism.

Personally, I don't think any religion should be tax exempt. They can write off all their charitable expenses, but pay taxes on all the wealth they're scamming their followers out of. There's no way one of those mega churches should get to operate tax free.

My own belief re: Evolution tends toward the Micro evolutionary scale. Whilst I DO believe that Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neandertalis ARE related to other higher Primates, particularly the Common Chimpanzee (in fact, in his book The Third Chimpanzee scientist Jared Diamond recommends classifying Pan troglodytes, the Common Chimpanzee, as Homo troglodytes instead; alternatively and preferably he considers humans a third species of Chimpanzee), I do NOT believe all life developed from primordial ooze.

If J. Diamond is right, what it means is not that humans are a species of Pan. It means that Pan paniscus and Pan troglodytes join us and Homo sapiens neandertalis (and Homo erectus, for that matter) as members of the family Man. Pan simply does not exist.

But then another question pops up. When was Homo sapiens sapiens given the breath of life, and in what manner did this make him different than the other Primates, including other members of Homo?

"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Gen. 2:7, KJV.

Clearly we distinguish between human rights and animal rights. My dog does not have the right to vote, serve in a public capacity (although some dogs do work for the handicapped, the military, and the police), and do many other things humans can do.

On the other hand, I freely admit that if I ever met FLATEARTHDENIAL, I would consider it my duty to let and encourage my dog to chew him up.

Does a Chimpanzee have a soul? I don't know. I have certainly never talked to one. Unless we count FLATEARTH, but that would probably be doing a great disservice to Chimpanzees to compare them to the GIGO (Garbage In, Garbage Out) that is his daily existence.

I would suggest to you that in fact Chimpanzees are in fact properly categorised in the class Pan. While Mr. Diamond makes an interesting case, ultimately, it fails to convince, except PERHAPS in the case of FLATEARTH. We realise that he has been reclassified so he can post here. Otherwise, anyone could be encouraged to remove the Chimpanzee.

All that having been said, what makes this Homo sapiens sapiens better than OTHER members of family Homo? Well, bigger brains for one thing. That can be used to turn pictures on a cave wall into a stylised picture into a symbol that is then regularised into an alphabet that is then used to develop Writing. And that example is just one like it.

Now, back to Genesis. How do we estimate the  Six Days to have taken place? Well, the Sun and the Moon and the Stars were not created until the Fourth Day. Until then, the light that radiated to the Earth must have been from another source. The Rabbis say that it was from the Throne of G-d. HOWEVER, this being the key word, how would you get 24 hour time periods without the Sun? So it is my contention that the first three days could each have been as long as G-d wanted them to be.The last four days would have 24 hours most likely.

Did other members of the Homo family have a soul? Likely they did on some level And the whole question of what Neanderthal was is still questionable. Was he Homo sapiens neandertalis? A subspecies of our species? Or Homo neandertalis, a separate species? Probabably the first since we know that every human ethnic group except the Negro has 2% to 4% Neanderthal DNA in their genome sequence. And the reason Negroes don't is because no Neanderthal lived in Sub-Saharan Africa. Since they could breed with us, and those offspring were obviously able to breed, it appears that they were Homo sapiens neandertalis.

Now did they have souls? I would think so. We could argue all day. If one lived today, would it have human rights? It should, in my mind. Their brains were actually larger than ours. But they were larger in the rear where cognitive memory is. They had to memorise EVERYTHING. Their frontal lobes were not well developed. Original thinking and new ideas was not their thing.

So, circling back to Genesis. Adam and Eve. Was there a first set of Homo sapiens sapiens? Well, yeah. At some point, you have to make a new model of something. You might even call them the prototype.

 G-d didn't intend for anything to go wrong. He gave us Free Will and the knowledge of what would happen if we chose disobedience. Death has been our lot ever since.

Human rights, I would think, would apply to anything that has the word Homo as a Family name to it. So Homo sapiens sapiens, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens neandertalis, and anything else they were to find alive or to (G-d forbid) clone in that category would have to be extended the same rights and privileges we take for ourselves.

Cloning is just a horrible idea in general. Pretending to be G-d is REALLY fucking with shit, and payback is a bitch, people. Its called karma.

As for FLATEARTH, he deserves no human rights. In fact, its too bad he's not kosher. I would recommend using him as an animal sacrifice.

No one has any right to worship, unless they are praising Lastation, Nowaru Ackbar.

Yes. Anybody should be able to exercise whatever 'religious' rights they want regardless of the popularity of their idea. The idea that it has to be recognized by the state is ludicrous and a wild overstepping of the government.

May the Flying Spaghetti Monster touch you with his noodly appendage. And remember, he boiled for our sins.







We have a better heaven than Christians, we have beer volcanoes and strippers.

In the United States of America we have absolute
freedom of speech and assembly.

Religion should not be treated any different
than a car club.

Hey, it worked for the Jedi, so why not the Pastafarians?
http://www.jedichurch.org/

Hey, it worked for the Jedi, so why not the Pastafarians?
http://www.jedichurch.org/

They actually seem really cool haha

The right to have a religion is covered by the right of opinion and the right to asociate. Religions should be treated as non-profit asociations (which is what they are or should be). As far as I know, that's how they are treated in Spain, except Catholicism because Vatican concordate or the traitors would throw a fit again. Democracy has conceded so much to these traitors, its really a shame.

In any case, yes, Pastafarism can be a religion if it claims to be so, and passes the regulations required for non-profit status.