• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    You might not understand the point of Pastafarianism. Nobody is pretending. The central tenet of faith is that ridicule is a spiritual act, that fanciful beliefs are arbitrary and spurious, and demand ridicule as a moral obligation. The FSM (PBUHNA) is made in the image of the absurd because the concepts of faith are absurd. You won’t find any Pastafarians who don’t believe in that.

    If you want to find some pretenders, visit a local church on Easter.

    • snooggums
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The point is that if you let one religion claim something, then you have to let the rest of them too. In practice that means people with “closely held beliefs” get free passes, but people who make decisions based on logic and reason don’t.

      So someone can claim certain clothing can be an exception for a closely held belief, but an atheist can’t have the exact same outcome because they don’t have a religion to use as a reason. I’m fine with some leniency, other than the fact that atheists don’t get any.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Pastafarianism is a closely held belief. Why shouldn’t they have the same rights as everyone else? The courts have created two classes of religions by rejecting the Pastafarian faith.

        • snooggums
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Pastafarianism is a clisely held belief. Why shouldn’t they have the same rights as everyone else?

          Why are you asking me about something I didn’t say?