Pastafarianism is NOT a parody religion.

[bluefirecorp_]

A district court violated the bill of rights in its ruling.

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Yet, congress formed federal district courts, and these courts ruled that 'this specific religion isn't actually protected'.

Huge violation of our bill of rights.

The SCOTUS must strike down the "parody" ruling; otherwise the state is violating the fundamental rights of its citizens.

[BADecker]

The problem with your thinking is that pastafarianism doesn't match the definition of religion as it was written in legal documents of old.

Pastafarianism isn't a religion. It's a game made up by a bunch of jokers who want to play a game. If they can offer evidence that it is a religion in the sense of religion in legal definitions of old, it will be reconsidered.

[bluefirecorp_]

Some claim that the church is purely a thought experiment or satire, illustrating that Intelligent Design is not science, just a pseudoscience manufactured by Christians to push Creationism into public schools. These people are mistaken — The Church of FSM is legit, and backed by hard science. Anything that comes across as humor or satire is purely coincidental.

R'amen.

[TECSHARE]

A district court violated the bill of rights in its ruling.

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Yet, congress formed federal district courts, and these courts ruled that 'this specific religion isn't actually protected'.

Huge violation of our bill of rights.

The SCOTUS must strike down the "parody" ruling; otherwise the state is violating the fundamental rights of its citizens.

not being protected does not equal to restricting "the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." You are confusing positive and negative rights. You have a right to free speech. You don't have a right to a newspaper ad or a bullhorn to be heard. You have a right to practice your religion, not get tax breaks and other protections.

[DaveF]

But you can get noodlyappendage coins here:
https://shorelinecrypto.com/market/DOGE-NDL



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=396227

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

https://www.venganza.org/


Now back to your regularly scheduled religious argument.

-Dave

[TECSHARE]

But you can get noodlyappendage coins here:
https://shorelinecrypto.com/market/DOGE-NDL



https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=396227

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

https://www.venganza.org/


Now back to your regularly scheduled religious argument.

-Dave

I prefer to think of it as a legal debate.

[bluefirecorp_]

Now back to your regularly scheduled religious argument.

Beer volcanoes and stripper factories

[number435398]

A district court violated the bill of rights in its ruling.

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Yet, congress formed federal district courts, and these courts ruled that 'this specific religion isn't actually protected'.

Huge violation of our bill of rights.

The SCOTUS must strike down the "parody" ruling; otherwise the state is violating the fundamental rights of its citizens.

Where's the link to the most recent case/ruling?

[BADecker]

You really need to see what the court decision says. According to the standard definition of religion, religion can be just about anything that you set your mind to in a strong way - https://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion. This isn't what the courts based their judgment on. Their definitions are listed in government documents and other court decisions.

[number435398]

You really need to see what the court decision says.

That's why I asked for a link! 

[TheCoinGrabber]

Can you link this particular news? I've not heard of it. Obviously many of these people consider Pastafarianism as a joke (which it certainly is, albeit a good-hearted one) but it does bring to question, what can you really classify as a religion?

There are religions springing up just coz some "prophet" had a revelation about so and so earlier religion. Islam is a very good example of this with the Church of Latter-Day Saints a more modern one. What about Jehovah's Witness, how did they got classified as a religion? All of this I mention were at one point "new" to the eyes of the older religion they are trying to replace.

Now back to your regularly scheduled religious argument.

Beer volcanoes and stripper factories

Don't worry, those judges would would get their deceased/diseased strippers and lukewarm beer.

[number435398]

There are religions springing up just coz some "prophet" had a revelation about so and so earlier religion.

Y'know, its all a joke until God or an angel talks to you or until you believe said "prophet" yourself.

[BADecker]

Not only is Pastafarianism NOT a parody religion, it's not a religion at all!

[TheCoinGrabber]

There are religions springing up just coz some "prophet" had a revelation about so and so earlier religion.

Y'know, its all a joke until God or an angel talks to you or until you believe said "prophet" yourself.

So which prophet is it? Every one calls himself "The Last Prophet". Everyone of them have their own remix on an earlier religion that sometimes it gets hard to recognize what the original was. Christianity got several sects, so do Islam (which is already a remix of the Israelite religion to begin with), everyone claiming to be "the one".

Which should one join?

[Vod]

Which should one join?

You choose to either boil, or do the boiling. 

[BADecker]

There are religions springing up just coz some "prophet" had a revelation about so and so earlier religion.

Y'know, its all a joke until God or an angel talks to you or until you believe said "prophet" yourself.

So which prophet is it? Every one calls himself "The Last Prophet". Everyone of them have their own remix on an earlier religion that sometimes it gets hard to recognize what the original was. Christianity got several sects, so do Islam (which is already a remix of the Israelite religion to begin with), everyone claiming to be "the one".

Which should one join?

It's the foundational paperwork that counts. Find the prophecies in the Bible. Then find which ones have been fulfilled and not. Then find which ones are set to be fulfilled in the future. If you don't know how to do this, you can find a lot of Internet guidance on the subject if you search for it. Then do the same for any of the other religious writings.

In addition, consider the strength of the Bible in the fact that it is the most published book around, and has wider distribution by far than any other. There is strength in the Bible, no matter how people interpret it on a personal or denominational basis.