Texas Pastafarian Wins Battle At DMV, Is First In U.S. To Wear 'Hat' In License Photo

My objection to this moron has nothing to do with religion. I simply believe he's an idiot.

 

How is he picking a fight with those that believe? His drivers license picture does not harm or threaten any of them. In fact an argument could be made that he is in fact helping to clarify their religious freedom. Now any religious person has a case that they can point to showing his religious freedom being protected.

Why does the fact that this guy wants to look stupid bother someone so much?

Why do some people obsess about Miley Cyrus? She is an entertainer that is expressing herself how she wants, she is an adult. If you dont like ketchup, order your burger without.

 

I can respect your opinion of him 100%. I may not agree with you but can understand why he upsets some. We have freedoms in this country, if he wishes to make fun of others in a lawful way he has that right. Restricting our rights anymore than they already have been is a major mistake in my opinion.

 

Look, I agree we have the right to act the idiot if we wish, I don't care about him doing that. I DO care that he has opened the door for people to wear things in their DL pictures which might obscure their images, thus rendering DL useless as picture IDs

I wouldn't care if the guy was standing right outside my church mocking Christians as they went too and fro. I would instead encourage them to make fun of him right back.

 

The Constitution does not protect nerdish pranks.

You have the right to say what you want about this snarky cult but that doesn't make it a religion. It is in fact anti religion.

 

"re·li·gion


/riˈlijən/


noun

noun: religion

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods."

A religion necessarily includes a belief in a deity. Rabid atheists have a zealous belief system, but that's not a religion.

 

Oh, but that's only part of the definition

Definition of RELIGION
1
a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion>
b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2
: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3
archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4
: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion


#4 fits atheists right down to a tee.

 

Well this comes down to semantics.
I agree atheist beliefs are followed religiously. But they have no religion to follow, per se.

 

Who gets to decide what is religion and what isnt? This guy says he is Pastafarian and believes in the flying spaghetti monster. Something that is completely ludicrous but if thats what he says he believes it is not my place our yours to decide if his religion is pure fantasy or not. If we allow government or anyone the ability to decide what religions are legit based on how believable they are, I would think christianity is also in trouble. This guy is shooting himself in the foot by actually strengthening the argument for freedom of religion if his goal is to get rid of it.

Your opinion of this guys religion does not in itself make it a nerdish prank.

Really, thats your whole problem with this guy? That he got to wear something on his head in his picture? I think the states can still disallow pictures that make someone unrecognizable in their photo. I believe that door had already been opened by other religious drivers and this is why a few pastafarians have chose to take this stance. Should a Jewish man be able to wear his Yamaka in his picture? a Sikh his turban? Either none should be allowed to wear anything on their heads or all should be able to, equal rights and protection. Whether they believe in a spaghetti monster or a man who floats in the sky and sees all. I am fine with no one wearing anything on their heads or faces.

 

This is why, as a non-believer I hate to be called atheist. Atheist are religious in their beliefs and do pretty much what they stand against. They are pretty much organized non-religion. I prefer no label other than someone who doesn't believe in god. I am also not an agnostic as they are someone who cant or don't care enough to decide what they believe.

 

Um what? I made not a single judgement about his religion. Not one. I in fact stated that I would also object to a CHristian covering his head in a DL picture.

It's a safety issue, nothing to do with religion. He can worship flying monkeys. No skin off my nose.

 

Um What? And in the post you quoted I never said you did unless you are looking at the comment that was directed at the other users quote in the same post. I said:

"Really, thats your whole problem with this guy? That he got to wear something on his head in his picture? I think the states can still disallow pictures that make someone unrecognizable in their photo. I believe that door had already been opened by other religious drivers and this is why a few pastafarians have chose to take this stance. Should a Jewish man be able to wear his Yamaka in his picture? a Sikh his turban? Either none should be allowed to wear anything on their heads or all should be able to, equal rights and protection. Whether they believe in a spaghetti monster or a man who floats in the sky and sees all. I am fine with no one wearing anything on their heads or faces."

I really fail to see where I claimed you said anything about his religion. I asked if you felt the same about a few examples because I didnt want to assume but my prediction would be yes, which is the same as my stance. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding there or it read differently than intended, I wasnt trying to say that you had made a judgement about his religion in that post.

Just to clarify, the other portion of that post was directed at the post quoted by Yosh above it. I hate when the forum lumps responses together in the same post like that.

 

Seriously? We know the exact point some
internet wise guy claimed this so called religion of his in order to mock and demean Christians, primarily. Pastafarianism is not a religion! It is a stunt and a satire on religion.
You obviously take these people much more seriously then they take themselves.

C'mon! Are you not aware this is all a joke?

I would not and some guy puts a colander on his head and you still don't see the intentional absurdity in it all?

Aside from drawing snickers from Dungeon and Dragons kids I don't see any effort to convince anyone they themselves take their own "religion" seriously.

These people are the outgrowth of a snarky, demeaning
joke started to mock Christianity. That's what makes it a nerdish prank.

 

Atheists can't follow the deity The Flying Spaghetti Monster by definition. I mean, really, it's bad enough when you fanatics try and redefine Atheism to be a belief simply because they lack belief in deities, yet here you are desperately trying to complain that atheists, not a particular group of atheists but atheists in general, believe in a god.

But i'm sure if you go on about "false religions" and "insulting" to your "real" religions, it will magically carry any remote weight as an argument whatsoever. Though of course you'll have to explain how all those other religions that claim the same "requirements" for a "real" religion are wrong about Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Satanism, Baptists, Mormons, etc. etc. etc.

I'm guessing you won't really be able to do that. In fact you'll probably go into denial mode to protect your frail little belief structure. Problem is at the end of all that, no matter how much denial you put forth, you still don't actually have a logical argument that doesn't contradict your stance on all those "real" religions.

Try again?

 

I think people like the pasta bowl sicko are desperately seeking attention from Christians.

 

Uh oh. The atheists' arrogance has finally gotten the best of them. Do you know what this means? If he's citing this as part of his religious beliefs, then atheism officially becomes a religion. And thus all attempts to secularize society are now blatant violations of separation of church and state.

I'll be contacting the ACLU tomorrow. Expect a lawsuit.

 

AWESOME! I don't honestly see why it would matter what anyone is wearing as long as their face is visible. I wish they had the option for full body photos so I could show up in a Boba Fett or Predator costume......minus the helmet obviously.

 

No dumber than belief in a zombie Jew who was raised from the dead and flew off into the sky to hang out with himself, who is also his own father.

If your insults towards this man were directed at other religious people, you'd call that bigotry and hatred. How ironic of you.

It was actually created to prove a point - one that is obviously lost on someone like you.

Actually, you're the one being the intolerant, hateful bigot. I can quote your hatred over and over in this thread, but what has he actually said that's intolerant, hateful, or bigoted? Quote him.

You have a pathetic persecution complex.

 

Just like Mormons are desperately seeking attention with magic underwear or Protestants are desperately seeking attention from Jews?

 

Oh look. An attack on my frail belief structure when I've already stated that I'm agnostic. Maybe instead of trying to accuse me of something and hoping it sticks, you actually use facts instead.

And atheists apparently can follow a deity. It even says as much on the official "church of the flying spaghetti monster" web page. Now admittedly they claim to have followers from other religions too so their's no real way I can say this member of the pastafarian is an atheist, but it obviously blows your whole atheists can't be pastafarians arguement out of the water.

Here you go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

http://www.venganza.org/about/

Try again?

 

just shows some athirst are as dumb as some Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, ect... in other-words they are no different then any other group as they all have some stupid people

just look at some of the things religious folks blame on God

"Virginia lawmaker: Children with disabilities are God&#8217;s punishment to women who previously had abortions."

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/02/22/disabled-abortion/


.



.

 

You'll get no arguement from me.

 

Which, given your ridiculously ignorant rants against Atheism, would make you a Theist. Unless of course you're one of those hilariously ignorant religious folks who think agnostic means "middle-ground".

Oh dear, you didn't quite read when you were spouting off your fanatical ignorance did you?

You've ranted that it's a "false" religion in relation to other religions. You've stated it simply existing and it holding it's particular tenets of belief is "making fun of organized religion". You complain that somehow it's wrong that they consider themselves the one true religion, only to then complain that they are somehow making fun of people because they want them to join their religion. Then ranting, again, that atheism is a "religion" because atheists believe in a deity, despite the fact they can't be atheists by definition.

You have no argument against Pastafarianism other than the fact you clearly can't handle your own personal issues in regard to dismissing it but holding faith in your other beliefs, whatever they may be.

Thaaat isn't really an argument against Pastafarianism. It's just your denial. Try again?

Whoops, sorry. They still can't. An atheist lacks belief in deities by definition. If you believe in the deity The Flying Spaghetti Monster, you can't be an atheist by default. An atheist is someone, anyone, who lacks belief in deities. And that doesn't magically change because you don't want to be wrong.

Try again?

Hahahaha, oh dear. You're really getting desperate aren't you. Pastafarians can't be atheists if they believe in the deity The Flying Spaghetti Monster.

It's a fact. If they believe in a deity, they can't be an atheist. The same way you, as a self-proclaimed (but hilariously biased in favour of "legitimate religions") agnostic, are either an Atheist or a Theist.

As for your hilarious links, it appears the Wikipedia page details that it's a religion and that it follows the deity (once again shutting your claims of an atheist religion down). While the official page has entire sections detailing how it is not an atheist organisation and that they admit anyone of any faith into the following of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The "atheists" you're complaining about relate to being allowed to follow their doctrines without adhering to their belief in the FSM, while being within their organisation. The same way an atheist can still help out at a Church and not be a Christian (though given your deliberate ignorance, it would seem you'd think they'd magically become a Christian as well).

So it appears both your links refute your claims that someone worshipping the FSM can be an atheist. In fact the official webpage for the religion details that they are not an atheist organisation.

...

So, despite how clearly desperate you've become to "prove" Pastafarianism is somehow a "false" religion to prop up your own beliefs, care to try again? Perhaps this time come up with an argument that your own sources don't refute? Hahahahaha.

 

Despite loads of snarky condescension do Pastafarians really "believe" in this absurd mock deity they've concocted in order to parody religion? Obviously not!

They can if their "belief" is all for show.

Oh well...never mind then, if they say so

...

The "religion" is a joke and not such a clever one at that. It's absurd in order to mock Christians, and others, and if you really believe that this "religion" (spawned not very long ago by an off handed internet comment) is valid then either you believe the joke or can't see through it. Either way, not so bright.

 

Whoops. As it turns out atheists do claim to follow this "religion" despite what you claim. And further more I never said that atheists claim to believe in the spaghetti monster, I said they pretend. You really might want to start paying attention. Now either you're the official spokes person for all atheist(which I highly doubt), desperately grasping and trying come up with excuses as to who and why people are doing this and just lying in general.

And oh look, another petty jab against my beliefs. I'm agnostic. That means I don't worship jack crap but I guess when you're running on fumes you have to start making attacks against me. Oh as far my sources go, they didn't disprove anything that I said. By the way, can you tell me who it is that always argues the flying spaghetti monster in an arguement against religion? I seem to recall it always comes from atheists. Talk about deliberate ignorance.

Now would you like to try again or are you just going to keep up with the petty little personal attacks and ignore the facts?