Comments on: For years, I have been forced to call myself a Taoist

By: mentos

mentos — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 20:28:57 +0000

I’m sorry, I know this is love mail, but I really don’t like what the person in this mail is saying.

This site is not here to counter “those blasted Christians”, you’ve come to the wrong place.

Although some religious people are lowlife idiots, there are wonderful religious people with a good amount of sanity stuffed in their mind. Stereotyping Christians like this… I find this behaviour about as disgusting as racism and homophobia. Please find your own atheist site.

By: Boneman

Boneman — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 18:50:15 +0000

I think of myself as a Taoist as well. It is an ‘atheist spirituality’ and it is entirely compatible with evolution AS IT ACTUALLY OCCURS, rather than the silly, twisted and inaccurate ‘guided evolution’ that many religious people pin their hopes on. In fact, some of the verses in Tao Te Ching anticipate Darwin and modern physics, using poetry rather than mathematics. “Nothing is ‘done’, but everything gets done.”

Taoism is a way of thinking rather than a set of beliefs. What I love most about it is that it is perfectly possible to be a Taoist and a complete believer in the FSM (all hail his noodliness). It is good to meditate on the Yin/Yang balance between the physical existence of a plate of delicious pasta and the nourishing energy that the pasta provides. The FSM (all hail his noodliness) is the supreme ultimate in that his physical existence provides the nourishing energy for the entire universe.

PS: One of the best ever analyses of American Christian fundamentalism is ‘Stranger In A Strange Land’ by Robert Heinlein. Written in the 1950s. Supressed under McCarthyism. Still frighteningly relevant. Now available in its original full length. It’s a thumping good read.

By: Red DutchPasta Wench

Red DutchPasta Wench — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:26:40 +0000

VegetarianCannible
Dec 7th, 2007 at 3:42 am
although I have innvoked the name of His Noodleyness on many occasions, I am new to this mecca of a website. I have noticed that most of the depictions of the FSM have two meatballs within. this leads me to wonder, Can Vegetarians be Pastafarians?!
*
Of course they can! Just take something else: tofu or something instead of meat. He is whatever you want Him to be :)

By: rmw

rmw — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:46:40 +0000

@paradox–actually, the main point of FSMism is to demonstrate the illogic of teaching ID in science classes when it does meet the definition of “science.” The problem doesn’t lie so much in religion, but in dogma and fundamentalism, and in the case of Christianity, literal interpretation of the Bible. (Note: other religions and their fundamentalists have this same problem.)

By: VegetarianCannible

VegetarianCannible — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:47:22 +0000

did Marynara give birth to the FSM’s son? or was it the Maridonna

By: VegetarianCannible

VegetarianCannible — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:45:21 +0000

On another note, in an episode of A Pup Named Scooby-doo there was a man eating spaghetti monster, but he lacked the ability to fly. Unlike the original Scooby show, this monster was not a man in a suit, but real! I humbly ask the prophet if this monster was a relation, or representation of the Flying version that we know so well?

By: VegetarianCannible

VegetarianCannible — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:42:35 +0000

although I have innvoked the name of His Noodleyness on many occasions, I am new to this mecca of a website. I have noticed that most of the depictions of the FSM have two meatballs within. this leads me to wonder, Can Vegetarians be Pastafarians?! I am a vegetarian, so I don’t support meatballs. How then can you expect me to support the the visage of the one who created all as a spaghetti WITH MEATBALLS monster?!!!!

By: noerart

noerart — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 02:24:22 +0000

@meichan: “By that mode of thinking then, people must be able to give a cogent and convincing argument for what they believe…That argument then subject to a vote? Reviewed by yourself only? Who chooses the committee? FSM itself? the moderator of this blog?”
.
A vote? Please…
Keep in mind that I am/was speaking for myself only. And the only one responsible for *my* opinion is me.
.
Now…at the risk of repeating myself: All I want to see is that people have put some thought into the choice of what they believe - rather than just spouting the “company line”…
That’s all I ask, show me YOUR reason for believing, not the reason someone else gave you, and I’ll respect that - whether I like the reason or not. Of course if the latter is the case, or if I just generally disagree, I’ll be more than ready to discuss it with the person in question.

By: Noodly Nation

Noodly Nation — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:44:36 +0000

@paradox Dec 6th, 2007 at 6:55 am
“meichan the whole point of FSM is that there is absolutley no evidence, proof or reason to believe in a god whatsoever”
.
The point of CoFSM is to point out the absurdity of teaching religion as science in schools!

By: Pluto

Pluto — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:18:56 +0000

@meichan- This is our site. People come here to discuss the possibilitys. What you’ve failed to note is that the hatefull religious types come here to try and ridicla us and threaten us with hell fire. So we do what any rational person would do and point out the massive holes in their arguments. We don’t spit on their belifes, they come here to do that to us. Apparently when we spit back it’s better than them.
They spit in the face of reason! They spit in the face of humanity! They are species traitors!
As I’m very fond of saying: If you want to have an opinion be prepared to back it up, if not you shouldn’t be allowed to have one.
“He didn’t make the Nazis do it, he certainly didn’t make Mao Tsetung do it…” No but god was used by these monsters to justify what they did.
“…but the idea of a god gives comfort to millions, maybe billions of unfortunate people out there who may, but more likely do not, have facebook accounts.”
You don’t need a PC to see flaws in logic. Religion revels in it. This site was founded as a response to teaching Intelligent Design in science classes! Not Religious Education or a church, but being touted about as science when it’s not. See if this became the norm we would lose all we have learnt! The fact that billions whish to believe that which as been proven a lie, don’t make it the truth.
I hope I helped you understand.

By: Iscariot

Iscariot — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:09:42 +0000

@meichan-Why is it that so many people treat a religious belief as untouchable? Some scientists do not straight out say certain things so as to not upset the religious community. what the hell for? we have to treat these people with deference because they decided to blindly believe in something? We have to treat religionists with respect that most of them sure as hell don’t give us. and go tell some hardcore christian that you are an atheist meichan, see how much respect you get, go tell Ann Coulter or randall terry you’re an atheist. at least people can have some interesting conversation here that otherwise wouldn’t happen. maybe we can “convert” some people, ever think of that you turd? think about it meichan

By: meichan

meichan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 17:04:54 +0000

OK, I see, you are railing against the insanity of it. OK. By insanity, I guess that you mean lack of logic, no empirical evidence. I will refrain from asking how you can prove that there’s not a god. I don’t want anybody here to have an aneurysm. What about other ‘insane’ ideas though? Do you loathe Plato? Does DaVinci give you the runs? What about Hindi mysticism,….a bad skin rash? And how do you feel about the Dalai Lama? And if these examples puzzle you, they are other people who have had an extraordinary impact on culture, learning and the world around us. (depending on how big your world is, of course)

and to you paradox, well I feel for you. I would not enjoy living in a country where we let our church and state gang up. It’s just bad. No argument. No one’s religion should not in anyway come in the way of education.

By: paradox

paradox — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:05:51 +0000

@ meichan I don’t care if every single religious person is the nicest person in the world and if every single atheist is a serial killer, that doesn’t make believing theres an old invisible man in the sky any less stupid and insane. I don’t care if people kill in the name of religion, or if atheists kill people, that has no bearing on the fact that religion is illogical. You have as much reason to believe in God as you do to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, that is the point of this entire thing!

By: paradox

paradox — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:55:02 +0000

meichan the whole point of FSM is that there is absolutley no evidence, proof or reason to believe in a god whatsoever, and that it is fucking ridiculious. Would you ‘tolerate’ people ‘having faith that’ 2+2=5? Would you let people teach that in schools alongside 2+2=4 to ‘teach the controversy’? You have probably never questioned your belief in god, but try to see it from our perspective

By: Noodly0ne

Noodly0ne — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:52:56 +0000

Oh yeah, yaaay for Zhang!

By: Noodly0ne

Noodly0ne — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:52:15 +0000

@ meichan-The FSM gives me hope and is my religion. I (grudgingly) tolerate your kind, those who
a-muck about all “holier-than-thou” and generally are killjoys. and
b-are intolerant bigots.
I like short, unmoderated posts.

By: meichan

meichan — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:34:13 +0000

By that mode of thinking then, people must be able to give a cogent and convincing argument for what they believe…That argument then subject to a vote? Reviewed by yourself only? Who chooses the committee? FSM itself? the moderator of this blog?

By: noerart

noerart — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 05:26:08 +0000

@meichan: so it’s wrong to try to make people actually *think* about what it is they believe in - so they can decide for themselves? As opposed to people just believing in whatever they were taught as kids.
I don’t mind people being religious - but I don’t want to hear the usual PR rant we’ve all heard a million times before, nor do I appreciate the scare-tactics certain people employ.
.
I have *no* respect whatsoever for those that simply believe what they are told. Be they religious or not(personally I find that atheists can be as much of a pain - if not more - than any religious person out there). If a person can give me a good, thought-out reason for why he or she believes as he/she does then I’ll respect that. However if all they are capable of giving me is simply the standard bs that everyone and their grandmother seems to spout these days(atheist and theist alike) then sorry, respect just became a foreign word to me. I’ll try and be courteous to the person, by all means(at least for as long as my patience lasts) - but don’t expect me to actually have any respect for them until they can prove they are more than cowards hiding behind the words and beliefs of other people, simply because they can’t/won’t think for themselves.
.
Oh, and by the way.. “All in the name of humour?” No, not the way I see it, the humour - the satire, the sarcasm, the whatever - is just another way of making people think. Of making them see it from a different angle. Nowadays the word “humour” seems to have become synonymous with mindless entertainment, it isn’t - mere “humour” can make you think. Bill Hicks would be a good example of this. The man had something to say, and he said it - and he made people laugh while doing it in a, some would say, outrageous way. (admittedly I don’t agree with *all* his views, but that’s an other matter entirely)
.
Ok, done ranting. Sorry about that.

By: Jennyanydots

Jennyanydots — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 00:12:38 +0000

Wait a minute, are they unfortunate only because they don’t have Facebook accounts? And rather than being “all in the name of humour”, how about all in the name of rationality, and against unthinking faith and the demonisation (sorry, but can’t think of a more appropriate word offhand) of intellectual curiosity?

By: meichan

meichan — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 06:45:39 +0000

C’mon guys!! OK, to be honest you got a couple of snickers out of me, anyone not in ultra-conservative arena is going to laugh at your cause once, maybe twice. That’s it, that’s all ya got. Why not just go, call yourselves Athiests and (I kNOW being PC is so mature, and hence SUCH a drag!) respect others beliefs. You are blatantly looking to raise the hackles of any and maybe all ‘believers.’ Maybe you are all very steadfast in your belief that there is no organizing power, no God nothing to fear or praise, AND THAT’S FINE!! But what you are doing is the equivalent of taking what not one group holds dear, but all spiritual followers, you are calling them daft and then hocking some spit on their prophets, icons, gods, whatever. All in the name of humour? Help me understand this–I am not a religious zealot, I am not even religious, I just think that what you do is nonsense, insensitive and banal. I’m sure that someone will come back with the whole argument of the evils that have arisen from religion, but alas, we all know that that argument is poor. People pick up information from different sources, process it and make conscious decisions. News flash–God didn’t make me do it! He didn’t make the Nazis do it, he certainly didn’t make Mao Tsetung do it but the idea of a god gives comfort to millions, maybe billions of unfortunate people out there who may, but more likely do not, have facebook accounts. With all due respect (which is just a tiny, tiny bit) enough already!