1219897 Views
800 Comments

What exactly do you think you are going to prove?

Published July 22nd, 2011 by Bobby Henderson

What exactly do you think you are going to prove? it’s just disrespectful to other human beings faiths and beliefs, and im sure u of all people should know u can’t put any sense into say a devout christian. Honestly, what your doing is the equivalant of making a rude, sarcastic joke to a child that doesn’t understand humor. u cant tell a christian thats been raised from birth to believe that there’s a magic man in the clouds that he’s wrong. you’ll just get what uve been getting, hate mail, and death threats. God is the equivalant of santa exept the child is never told he isn’t real until it’s to late. and u think your doing a good thing by making up this pastafarian crap to prove how absurd the idea of god is. what i don’t think u understand is that u cant argue with idiots about this stuff as most christians are dont know a thing about science.(I apoligize to all respectable christian scientists). as an athiest, im disgusted what youre doing. like making fun of christians being killed by somali’s, and u quoting, "apparently they thought there god could give them safe passage"(yes ive read ur website). really, did it ever, or does it ever occur to you that these people are actually human being’s with family’s and feeling’s, and just because they think the world was created  differantly than u, u have to mock them… that’s kind of a dick move. your being no better than they are(religious people) by making fun of and disrespecting other people just ’cause they think differantly than u. oh wait u are religous, u worship a flying spaggetti monster. which means i have the right to ridicule u on how stupid your dumbfuck religion is(oh may the great pasta diety forgive me for my sin) and dont deny that u worship the all mighty pasta king, because your the leader of the church. with the true words of your religion written on a piece of paper. it’s ironic that u, by trying to prove how bad religion is. go about it by u yourself inbodying everything that is wrong with human beliefs. u are everything that is wrong with athiesm. u go around acting all superior and pompus, like u know better than everyone else and tell them why there wrong mockingly. the world would be a better place if u took all your "followers" (butt pirates) got on a pirate ship and ate spaggetti until you all died of overeating.have u ever heard the term live and let live? and i love it how  u post all the hate mail u get on a your page to be ridiculed by your cronies( who by the way need to get of the internet and do something productive)yes we all the the bible huggars are gonna say dumb stuff because they’re uneducated. but that doesn’t mean u have to be immature and make fun of there faults so just lay off. even though this message sounds hostile just know i agree with what your’e trying to do (i think) educating people, i just wholly disagree with how u are going about it.

-David

A short response from Bobby:

It’s not our intention to mock or offend anyone. But I realize people sometimes feel mocked  or offended.

It might be fair to say that we’re disrespectful.  I would agree that most Pastafarians don’t respect the notion that religion should sit on a pedestal.  We don’t think that because an action is explained in the context of religion it is exempt from the scrutiny it otherwise would have been subjected to.  Religion is not a free pass for crazy ideas and crazy actions. 

I would agree that it’s not our place to pass judgment on those who see the world through a lens of religion.  But neither is it our place to ignore when personal belief becomes public action.  We can accept that some choose to teach their kids the earth is 6000 years old and that dinosaurs are a myth.  But if they push for those ideas to be taught in our schools, it’s no longer a question of respecting personal belief.

The idea that rational minded people must be anti-religion is a wrong one, I think.   If we must draw a line to divide ourselves, I’d prefer the line be positioned between reasonable and unreasonable people, rather than religious and non-religious people.  

It’s one thing to see the world through a lens, and another thing to act as if it’s the only lens that can exist.

I believe there is no group more tolerant of other religious and nonreligious groups than Pastafarians, without question.  The death of the Christian sailors by pirates was a sad thing for everyone who heard of it, I’m sure.  My hope is that it doesn’t happen again.  The hard question is:  will criticizing the decision to venture into dangerous areas on the basis of faith help avoid a similar situation in the future?  I don’t know the answer.  But I wonder how many of their friends and family wish they had shaken them and said this is a bad idea, don’t do this.  This is one of the hard questions – this line between respect and concern. 



800 Responses to “What exactly do you think you are going to prove?”

1 5 6 7 8 9 27
  1. Plaristote says:

    “which means i have the right to ridicule u on how stupid your dumbfuck religion is”

    Actually no, you can’t.
    Atheists and others have to respect the beliefs of other people. So they can’t make fun of some dumb shit only because it is labelled as religion. So no : Pastafarism is a religion. If we don’t make fun of other religions, you can’t make fun of ours.
    That’s really to strong spot on Pastafarism : atheist can’t make fun of other religions. So they make a dummie religion that religious people can’t make fun of either : because it’s OUR religion.

    • Meiguoren says:

      I think it’s bad to make fun of anyone when they are sincere about their beliefs whether they are theistic or atheistic beliefs.

      It’s a stretch to say that Pastafarism is a religion. The whole purpose of the flying spaghetti monster analogy is to demonstrate the supposed ridiculousness of believing in a god and it’s a really bad analogy for many logical and moral reasons. Religions organically develop over time and rely on tradition and culture. Even the newer religions are based on older established religions.

      • Insightful Ape says:

        “Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”
        — Thomas Jefferson

      • Meiguoren says:

        Just because Thomas Jefferson said something in a private letter 200 year ago does not mean he believed what he was saying. He was a man of contradictions and from what I know about him he would never publicly ridicule anyone.

        • TiltedHorizon says:

          If this was the only example of his beliefs then I may have sided with you but there is no shortage of notes and personal letters evidencing his options (i.e. “ridicule”) of the trinity.

        • wulff says:

          Doesn’t it make more sense to assume that something said in a private letter is *more* likely to be true than something said publicly?

        • Meiguoren says:

          I don’t doubt that he didn’t belive in the trinity but I just couldn’t see him publically ridiculing it. Put it this way, if he were alive today, I don’t think he would create a website dedicated to ridiculing the trinity.

        • wulff says:

          What you said was that because he said it privately it didn’t mean he believed it. Many politicians say and do things publicly that directly contradict their private views. Just look at how many congressmen have spoken about the evils of the homosexual lifestyle but have caught engaging in extra-marital gay affairs. My point was that someone’s private life is more representative of their *true* beliefs than their public life.

        • Meiguoren says:

          I guess I’m going off the premise that actions speak louder than words. Is it a *true* belief if your actions contradict your words? Was he an outspoken critic of the trinity who believed that the best course of action was to ridicule the trinity or did he keep it to himself in private letters to close friends? Did he truly believe in small government as he made a deal to double the size of the country? Did he believe in limited military intervention as he sent the American fleet to destroy the Barbary pirates? Did he believe the the words as he penned “We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal” while he held a plantation of slaves?

        • Insightful Ape says:

          OK, since the matter has come to this, please explain to me how 1 can be the equal of 3. Until then, it seems someone failed first grade math, and I will not stop pointing that out, whether it makes you uncomfortable or not.

        • Meiguoren says:

          I assume you posted the Thomas Jefferson quote because you believe it is okay to ridicule religion and you are using to quote to validate your belief. I am just pointing out that Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t publicly ridicule anyone. You don’t seem to have a problem with it though.

      • Meiguoren says:

        Well it seems a bit out of character for a soft spoken exceedingly polite person. I always thought he did his public dirty work through other people like Callender. I could be wrong though.

        • Insightful Ape says:

          Didn’t he?
          Well I don’t know what you call this:

          “And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter.”

          Thomas Jefferson in letter to John Adams

        • Meiguoren says:

          I call it a private letter to a friend.

          Hey, can I try?

          “But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

          “Had the doctrines of Jesus been preached always as pure as they came from his lips, the whole civilized world would now have been Christians.”

          This is a long one….
          ” I say, that this free exercise of reason is all I ask for the vindication of the character of Jesus. We find in the writings of his biographers matter of two distinct descriptions. First, a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstitions, fanaticisms and fabrications. Intermixed with these, again, are sublime ideas of the Supreme Being, aphorisms and precepts of the purest morality and benevolence, sanctioned by a life of humility, innocence and simplicity of manners, neglect of riches, absence of worldly ambition and honors, with an eloquence and persuasiveness which have not been surpassed. These could not be inventions of the groveling authors who relate them. They are far beyond the powers of their feeble minds. They shew that there was a character, the subject of their history, whose splendid conceptions were above all suspicion of being interpolations from their hands.”

      • Insightful Ape says:

        I quoted Jefferson to show you that freedom of religion doesn’t mean religion should be immune from criticism. In case you forgot, freedom of religion doesn’t come from religion itself (rather, it is forbidden in the very first of the 10 commandments). Rather, in the US it comes from the Bill od Rights, the author of which said it was OK.
        As for doing it publicly, it is flawed logic that if Jefferson didn’t do it, I shouldn’t do it either. He was a politician, and he may have had personal considerations that do not apply to me.
        So what happened with 1=3 (which Jefferson never believed in, by the way)? Any answers yet? If not, why shouldn’t I point that out?

        • Meiguoren says:

          Sorry, I didn’t get that out of the quote. Kind of out of the blue if that is what you were trying to say. Anyway, you’re entitled to ridicule whatever you want. I’m just saying Jefferson wouldn’t have.

        • Insightful Ape says:

          Didn’t he?
          Well I don’t know what you call this:
          “And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter.”
          Thomas Jefferson in letter to John Adams

        • Meiguoren says:

          What’s up with the Jefferson quotes anyway? I thought you guys weren’t allowed to worship ancient dead men.

        • wulff says:

          You are allowed to worship ancient dead men when you can prove their existence. There is significant historical evidence to the existence of Thomas Jefferson. There is also significant historical evidence supporting the existence of Siddhartha Gautama, or as he’s more commonly known, Buddha. The ONLY “historical evidence” offered to support any of the claims in the bible is the bible itself.

        • Meiguoren says:

          I thought the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama were carried on through oral tradition before they were written down. Was I wrong?

        • Meiguoren says:

          Well it doesn’t really matter anyway. I guess you won’t be quoting Jesus any time soon. Too bad he has some good ones. ;) Buddha and Thomas Jefferson had some good ones too though.

        • Insightful Ape says:

          You guess wrong.
          I love this quote from Luke:
          12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:   
          12:52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
          12:53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

          He got that right!

        • Meiguoren says:

          Those aren’t the good ones I was referring to. But to each is own I guess.

  2. ALLISON KARALUS says:

    Ha, ha, ha, your plate of spaghetti has a pair of conch eyes in it…My new agenda:
    Repent & be baptized! Jesus said, “I am God there is none besides me.” “I am the Way, the Truth & the Life. No man comes to the Father except by me.” “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” “As many as received Him to them He gave the power to become the sons of God the Father even to those who believe on His name.” Jesus’ healing ministry began with adult baptism.
    A New Agenda: We the people need no gas & no electric to have a man child with the spouses of our youth around the world. We shall build homes without electric, without gas, without roofs that exceed 7 & 1/2 feet, & with incinerators to burn garbage, burn dung, burn urine, & burn blood rags so that the entire sisterhood has a man child with the husbands of their youth.
    TAKE MY CONFESSION WITH YOU. I have smoked cigars for 11 years & have no lungs, liver & kidneys at 44 years old. I continue to live through the Lord Jesus Christ as I received the Holy Spirit at 4 years old & was baptized as an adult in 1997. I continue to read my Bible & now use burned dung, urine, blood rags & tobacco butts to make meat offerings to eat. The Old Testament says that burned dung, urine, & blood rags were a part of the laws of Moses. Yes, it was in 2001 while I was driving to Florida that I was talking to the saints in heaven & Isaiah said, “You know that 70 years from now the sun will be dimmed in the sky” Oh, I said, “I don’t know.” I went back over the Old Testament & it said, “The sun shall be dimmed in the sky” & “I shall make them eat the grass of the field.” & “all these things shall come to pass” before the Lord Jesus Christ returns.
    4 years ago I was stamping my feet at work over the excessive electric usage & complaining that I didn’t have a husband & children to God the Father. I prayed, kneeling at my bed as to adopting children. Then while I was at work I adopted over 500 children in Swahili (I was born with a spot-was a reject in Hebrew) to find out what day it was. I had been taught prophesy at Wheaton Evangelical Free Church in 1979 & 1980. We went back & forth in time while Governor Blagovich was verifying. We came up with 17 years of darkened sun before July 29, 2081.
    July 29, 2081-the rapture of believers in Christ Jesus-all those who received the Holy Spirit-at the trumpet sound in heaven-1st the dead & then the living ascended to heaven in a twinkling of an eye
    July 29, 2081-2088-the Great Tribulation-God’s wrath is poured out on the earth, Judgment of the Believers in Christ Jesus & the Marriage Supper of the Lamb in heaven
    2088-3057-the Reign of Christ Jesus-(the Bible stated “1000 years” & in actuality it was 969 years)
    3057-3059-the Devil is loosed out of the pit –(the Bible stated “a time & a half” & in actuality it was 1 & three fourths years)-the battle of Armageddon-the nations are drawn together for the last battle in the Valley of Megiddo-the Lord Jesus comes down of a white horse with the words, “King of Kings, Lord of Lords” written on His thigh & a sword comes out of His mouth to destroy all who are in the battle. The bible says that the blood runs a “horses’ bridle high” & birds feed on the bodies.
    3059-the old heavens & the old earth pass away & the new heavens & new earth are created by the Lord Jesus Christ-at this point in time the Lord Jesus says, “Depart from me I never knew you.” to all who died in the battle of Armageddon, to those who took the mark of the beast in their right hand or forehead during the tribulation, to all who died during our time without receiving the Holy Spirit, & to all those who died during the flood of Noah’s day in wickedness. Jesus says, “In this world you shall have trouble, but I have overcome the world.”
    Jesus says, “If we confess our sins He is faithful & just to forgive us our sins & to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

    • tekHedd says:

      WOT;DNR

      What is this supposed to accomplish? It would have to make some sort of sense to invoke Poe…

    • wulff says:

      Does anybody want to check with Arkham and see if their missing a patient? It looks like Joker’s found religion.

    • Mal says:

      What? Seriously, what the hell?

    • Wayne says:

      His Noodlyness requests that I stay my hand and leave this for the ‘peanut gallery’. He didn’t say so, but I could smell stale beer and Napolitana Sauce with Basil, so that will do me.

      So ALLISON, you have a new set of dates for the Rapture, hein? You’ve moved it forward a bit…I suppose the best way to stop people from disproving your claim is to move your claim out of reach.

      This is the literary work of a truly deluded Xtn. Do we need gas and electricity to have a girl child, or can we do without these if we want a daughter?

      I could call you a troll, and you may very well be. I was very amused over my breakfast reading it. In light of that it’s over to you, peanut gallery.

    • midnight rider says:

      That’s exactly what I was thinking too, Allison! j/k

    • Keith says:

      If Armageddon occurs in the middle of the 31st century why is jeebus riding a horse and carrying a sword in his mouth? I would have expected something a bit more high tech than that.

      “2088-3057-the Reign of Christ Jesus-(the Bible stated “1000 years” & in actuality it was 969 years)” But don’t the Daleks invade Earth during this time? (Around 2155 if memory serves me): so why doesn’t jeebus stop it?

    • Former dupe of a more ridiculous religion says:

      What’s the point of putting the rapture that far ahead? How are you going to make money out of that?
      To maximise returns you should keep placing the rapture a few months away, that gives you enough time to fleece the sheeple and time to come up with a reason that it has been delayed (again)

    • Spammyboy says:

      Is that an extract fro Finnegan’s Wake? On second thoughts, it makes even LESS sense than Finnegan’s Wake…

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Blah blah blah heaven… blah blah blah Jesus… blah blah blah eternal torment… blah blah blah I’m right and you’re wrong. Same shit different day Allison. When you have something new or worth discussing come back and try again.

      • TiltedHorizon says:

        I am not sure if you realized it D&WC, you post was the best argument for religion that I have ever read. Take for example: “Blah blah blah heaven”. Clearly your interpretation of ‘bla’ from the allegorical ‘bla’ is spot on, surely there is no other meaning. Don’t even get me started on,”blah blah blah Jesus”. Man, the way your mind make clear and sensible meanings from figurative texts is amazing, consider my mind blown.

        See Allison! If you only made half as much sense, since you did not, feel free to bla my bla bla.

        Ramen

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          After taking a closer look at your analysis of my writing, I have to agree with you. That’s it. I just converted myself back to xtianity…

        • TiltedHorizon says:

          Blamen!

        • wulff says:

          Drained, just put a cool rag to your forehead and lie down for a while. When you get up I’m sure you’ll come back to us. :)

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          You’re right, I may need to go lie down for a bit… :)

    • Atsap Revol says:

      Just for the hell of it I Googled ALLISON KARALUS. According to Google, there’s only one person with that name in the US. For further sample of KARALUSisms, go to her site. Here’s one example:

      “Not in device, nor creed. I am out of cats & kittens. You do error in not knowing the scripture & God is not willing that any should perish, but that all might believe on His Name-Jesus. Now is the time, now is the day of perdition to bear the fruit of repentance.”

      Apparently ALLISON is out of cats and kittens as well as a brain. She and BG should get together and write a weekly newsletter.

      Atsap Revol

      • TiltedHorizon says:

        Assuming BG allows her to write or lets her have an opinion, can’t have that.

        • Atsap Revol says:

          TILTED, I have no idea whether ALLISON and BG would be compatible. But ALLISON is way ahead of BG on posting. I found her cut-and-paste posts on over a dozen sites. The garbage she dumped on our site, she also flung on many others, word for word.

          Allison is 44 years old and lives in the midwest. She is likely going through the change. That would explain her meaningless ranting. Either that or like BG, she is just batshit crazy.

          Atsap

      • Omnipotent Zombie says:

        That would never happen Atsap. BG would never let Allison touch a computer, tv, non-bible literature or anything else that doesn’t belong in a kitchen or bedroom. That’s just the way BG rolls.

    • Puppygoogoo says:

      Wow. That is one of the most bizarre passages I have ever read. It actually scares me that people like this are out there. Having come from a religious background I understand the challenges of dealing with those with ‘sting beliefs’ but she takes the cake. Hope you find help soon.

      RAmen

      Puppygoogoo

      • Atsap Revol says:

        Puppygoogoo,

        In your religious background, did you ever consume burned dung, urine, blood rags, and tobacco butts? If not that that may be why you fail to interpret Allison’s thoughtful message correctly. She was taught to be a prophet in the Wheaton Evangelical Church in 1979 and 1980. She has talked to the Saints in Heaven while driving to Florida (this is an OK practice, unlike cell phone usage, it leaves the hands free). How can you question a person with her sterling credentials?

        Let us pray that we do not encounter her in traffic while she is communicating.

        Atsap

        • Puppygoogoo says:

          Atsap,

          Unfortunately I wasn’t lucky enough to go to that church. Is it bad that I wouldn’t mind going now that I’m curious how all those things link into a religion? Also don’t you need to have your hands together while praying? Doesn’t that break the road rules? Anyway it’s good to see the site back to it’s pre-bg days.

          Cheers

          Puppygoogoo

        • midnight rider says:

          Does swallowing BS count?

        • Atsap Revol says:

          It counts only if you can swallow it in big chunks without choking and with no water to wash it down. If you can do that, you qualify to be a fundamentalist Christian.

          Ramen
          Atsap

    • Zuri says:

      The looney bin called, they want their patient back.

      • Keith says:

        I would say the reason for Allison’s behaviour is written in her post. She says she has no lungs: ergo, no oxygen reaches her brain.

  3. FrozT says:

    The OP doth protest too much?

    FSMism has nothing to do with ostracizing other religions; you’ve missed the point entirely so allow me to wake you from your ranting delirium.

    Many atheists have tried to expose the veil that cloaks the disproportionate privileging of religion with moderate, but more often limited success. We instead do not view this as a problem which needs solving, but rather would like to pull back some of that fucking veil for those who have none. The cracks in secularism have let drip the dogma of the piety onto our society unscathed, it was only a matter of time before something else found its way in through those cracks. Of course, this is FSM. How could you have expected this not to happen? Is the rationality not obviously apparent? By the way, have you written your concern to the Center for Science & Culture (AKA Intelligent Design) community regarding their (to use a few of your own words, but exchanged for ones that are spelled correctly) pompous, superior, mocking, and disgusting attitude towards the scientific community? I only ask since your sense of moral duty can be deduced from the cause you have championed in writing us.

    Also I would like to correct you on a couple points.
    1.) We are trying to ‘prove how absurd the idea of god is.’
    – Incorrect. To do so would absurd since we ourselves have a deity.
    2.) We are ‘Trying to educate people [on atheism?].’
    – Also incorrect. It is improbable that our work would enlighten anyone, religious or agnostic on atheism, unless they were to only receive their news from venganza.org in which case it would be highly probable, although this education would be more topically aligned with Pirates and Pasta, than atheism in general. It is much more probable though, that FSMism will be used as a talisman for many already educated atheists; for example its inclusion in Richard Dawkins book, The God Delusion and the more scientifically influential television show, Futurama.

    Lastly, I would like to point out that your message as whole coveys’ an all too common vice of (to quote Dawkings again) ‘Donning kid gloves’ to debate the topics surrounding the creation of the universe I can’t imagine why anyone should be forced to keep their opinions to themselves for risk of insulting someone regarding what many consider to be a topic of incredible importance. It should be widely open for debate.

    Lastly, I don’t endorse violence of any kind or comments written with the intention of hurting people mourning the death of loved ones. I don’t think that was the case here but I will give you credit for one thing, and that is to remind us that even as a religion dipped in satire, we should exercise caution and avoid getting carried away, which would only serve to dilute our message.

    P.S. If you want to sound intelligible and you are not blogging from a T9 text editor, please don’t spell ‘you’ as ‘u’. And use a spell checker man…

    • Veekey says:

      Thank you! Someone else who understands what we stand for! I honestly don’t know why people are so pissed off with our religion. Is it so wrong to believe in a Flying Spaghetti Monster? We could say the same about God but we don’t. (Well, most of us anyway…) Thank you again. Lol

      • Spammyboy says:

        As much as I’d hat to make a similar point to Big Git, the fact that Right-wing Christians (right-wing in the American sense, not the European one) are getting worked up about this shows that there is a serious point to pastafarianism that they can’t just ignore using absurd ‘evidence’ like with a lot of other issues. We’re getting noticed.

        • Spammyboy says:

          *hate. Dammit, illiteracy is spreading…

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          I hope it isn’t contagious!

  4. Spammyboy says:

    Yes, Dave (can I call you Dave?), we are so judgmental towards Christians that we openly encourage them (along with people from all different religions, cults and movements) to engage in discussion with the many other posters on this site, which is our holy building. Not many religions let random heathens into their holy buildings, do they?

    • A Christian says:

      Mine does. It’s kind of a basic practice to welcome everyone.

      • Al (Dente) says:

        To a Christian says: “It’s kind of a basic practice” Having been to dozens of varying Christian Churches of different denominations I would say “kind of” is as precise as anything. While the doors are open for all to come inside that is hardly a true welcome. I doubt the welcome is warm and believable unless of course you’re dressed real nice and appear as a likley candidate for tithing with notible exceptions of “can you volunteer to help” in other ways. I have been chastised from many a Bible Study group and Sunday school class for asking questions or making statements that judgement of others is wrong.
        In the past 10 years I am actually 1 for 28 in attending a church that made me feel genuinely welcome. I will most certainly try others because I love people but “Kind of” just doesn’t get it for me. It’s like saying “that’s the least I can do”

        • A Christian says:

          I’m sorry you’ve had a bad experience with many churches. I think if you came to mine you would be fully welcomed and accepted. We don’t expect everyone to hold the same beliefs and people can dress however they want. As for the judging others, I’ve never met a group less judgmental. Based on your experience it sounds like we are not a typical church but I think there are more like ours out there than you may realize. Hopefully you’ll find what you are looking for. Maybe Quakers or Universal Unitarian would be a good fit.

      • Drained and Washed Clean says:

        Until you find out that they do something that you don’t like or approve of and then, on top of judging them and damning them to hell, they are no longer welcome.

      • Maggie says:

        Amen to that.

        • Atsap Revol says:

          That’s what I like about Pastafarianism. Unlike some other religions I could mention, we don’t judge people, we don’t damn them to hell, and all are welcome here as long as they behave civilly, even if they strongly disagree with our faith.

          Shouldn’t that be the basis for all religions?

          So, Maggie, I’ll say a prayer about your biased point of view.

          Ramen,
          AR

  5. Jessica says:

    Answering that letter on its merits and not stooping to criticizing the spelling = major win.

    • TiltedHorizon says:

      There were merits?

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Spelling and grammar speak to ones intelligence. Understanding that = major win.

      • A Christian says:

        I know some incredibly intelligent people who have fairly poor standard English grammar. Once a persons universal grammar is established early in life it is very difficult to change. It doesn’t have anything to do with intelligence.

        • Mal says:

          Can you provide evidence for your above assertions? What study shows that this “universal grammar” you speak of is very difficult to change?

          The ability to understand and effectively use proper grammar does indeed speak to one’s intelligence. Being taught poor grammar and refusing to fix it later in life speaks to one’s apathy and laziness. Either way, poor grammar is not well received in an environment where higher thinking is one of the chief goals.

        • A Christian says:

          Read Noam Chomsky’s Language & Mind for more information. I think most linguists subscribe to the notion of universal grammar.

        • Atsap Revol says:

          However, A CHRISTIAN, the ability to write and speak standard English is a learned skill. Yes, it may be harder for some to learn to speak and write correctly because of their early life. But an intelligent person will want to learn how to express themselves properly. Perfection isn’t necessary or expected, but excessively sloppy grammar and spelling mark the writer as uneducated, perhaps unintelligent, and definitely uncaring

          Pedantically yours,
          AR

        • Mal says:

          Perhaps I should have been more specific. Being an Anthropologist and therefore having had to study linguistics to some extent, I am somewhat familiar with the notion of universal grammar and linguistic universals. My issue is this: as far as I know (bearing in mind I’m no expert, of course), there has not been an actual scientific study that showed that once a person’s grammatical habits have been established, they are subsequently very difficult to change, as you claimed. This is one of the key reasons that universal grammar is primarily considered an “argument” and not a theory (a theory being a hypothesis that has been extensively tested and not satisfactorily dis-proven).

          I am also vaguely aware of some recent studies that showed quite the opposite. Apparently, with the right amount of desire, it is a simple task to change grammar practices. I’ll see if I can find some links for you.

        • A Christian says:

          Okay, ATSAP REVOL, you don’t have to shout my name, and you can call me Chris.

          Mal, all I know is I had a linguistics professor from Iran once who had the dammest time speaking English correctly. He had been in the country for thirty years and the guy was brilliant. Even with all he knew about grammar and how to form the sentence structures, it was very difficult to maintain perfect English.

        • Mal says:

          Ah, okay, I can see how there would be some misunderstanding. His grammatical practices were based on a completely different set of rules. I suffered from the same trouble when I was learning Arabic and German. Attempting to learn and apply a set of grammatical rules that is completely different from one’s native language is almost never easy, and there have been numerous studies that showed that for most people, it gets more difficult later in life.

          I think it should be easy to concede that this is different from changing one’s own practices concerning the same rule-set though. If someone learns improper English as a child, that does not necessarily mean that it is very difficult for them to learn and employ proper English later in life. I like to believe I’m a shining example of that. I am still firmly convinced that the language I learned in grade school was not actually English.

        • A Christian says:

          I don’t know why it would be different Mal. The notion that people with poor grammar are somehow more lazy or dumber is just pure elitist bullshit. And it must be true because I’m not the type of Christian who casually throws around the E word.

        • Mal says:

          Okay, I’ll put it simply then.

          Point 1: There are literally thousands or resources someone can use to improve their grammar. If someone KNOWS that they use improper grammar and they refuse to fix it, that is lazy, however you look at it. If someone does not know they use improper grammar (which I will admit is highly likely in today’s society), that is ignorance. While I will grant that ignorance is not stupidity, with the numerous resources available, that ignorance cannot be excused.

          Point 2: No matter how you want to look at it, in order to be taken seriously in an arena of intelligent debate such as this one, eloquence is pretty much required.

          So, again in an arena of intelligent debate, one must possess and USE proper grammar in order to be taken seriously. As argued in point 1, not using proper grammar in today’s society is either lazy or inexcusably ignorant. Possessing poor grammar is not necessarily unintelligent, but using poor grammar to argue otherwise intelligent topics is definitely pretty stupid.

          With regards to your “elitist” comment, I have two more points. On the first, I will speak only of the U.S. because I’m not familiar with other countries’ access to resources. In the U.S., one way or another, absolutely everyone has access to resources they could use to improve their use of the English language. Excusing learning disabilities, everyone can improve their grammar. It is not elitist to expect people to live up to their potential. Second, stating that something must be true because you’re not the type of person to casually throw around a word like that is all kinds of flawed. First, you must understand the meaning of the word elitist.

          It’s been nice debating with you, but implying that I am elitist was uncalled for.

        • Meiguoren says:

          You’re right, it was uncalled for. I wasn’t trying to specifically single you out as being elitist. I was trying to (unsuccessfully) make a general comment. Sorry I offended you.

          Anyway, I think it’s generally true that poor grammar does not equate to low intelligence as the first comment implied and I have a feeling you would agree with that statement, based on the scientific consensus. I could be wrong though.

          I don’t know why I’m defending this guy anyway. His backhanded defense of Christians is totally insulting and wrong.

          By the way, if you haven’t figured it out yet, I was posting as A Christian.

        • TiltedHorizon says:

          Proficient linguistic skills are an indicator of education and intelligence; obviously it is not the sole determinant of the two. We have had numerous posters who acknowledge English is not a native language; I do not fault them for it nor have I seen anyone else do so.

          Generally speaking, language contains a finite vocabulary from which it is possible to create a nearly unlimited set of utterances. We are exposed to a wealth of these variations, to which we add our own thoughts, as we advance our education, in academia and in life. Therefore what and how we articulate speaks to what we have learned, or more to the point, what we have not learned.

          For the record my argument revolves around proficiency with one’s first, and in many cases, only language. The fact that someone who is multilingual may not be proficient with a secondary language does not detract or diminish my point; in fact I think it strengthens it. If proficient linguistic skills are an indicator of education and intelligence then someone who speaks multiple languages is… ?

        • Atsap Revol says:

          At the risk of being branded an elitist, a christian (note the use of all lower case letters), I strongly agree with Mal’s statements. A person not handicapped with limited intelligence, and working in his or her native language, has no excuse in America for not improving spelling and grammar. Anyone desiring to function as other than a menial worker, must acquire language skills, unless, of course, they inherit a fortune.

          I advise young people that language skills are just as important as engineering and science knowledge. At 79, I still have some rough spots, but considering where I started, I’m doing OK.

          Atsap Revol, Elitist Bullshitter

        • Meiguoren says:

          Okay. I may have indulged in a bit of hyperbole with the elitist bullshit comment. I’m sorry for offending everyone.I didn’t realize it would touch a nerve. The main problem I have with that kind of reasoning is that it has lead to institutional and generational classism. Think about a person growing up in America speaking African American vernacular English. It is MUCH more difficult for him to speak standard English as an adult. If we limit his abilities to succeed in life by insisting he speak standard English, we condemn him and his children to the lower classes. Of course it is possible for individuals to overcome that giant hurdle, but how many?

        • Atsap Revol says:

          Yes, we agree that acquiring language skills is more difficult for some than others. But isn’t that true of succeeding in life in general? I know it’s currently politically correct to tolerate all manner of speech and writing, but where does that lead in the end? Currently some local dialects depart so far from standard English as to be unintelligible to those outside of the community. Is this what society should perpetuate?

          AR

        • Meiguoren says:

          Our society is accepting of nonstandard English when it comes to foreign born citizens. Why should we be un-accepting of nonstandard English of natural born citizens? The ability of standard English speakers to understand nonstandard English is the same whether the person speaking nonstandard English is foreign born or born domestically.

        • Atsap Revol says:

          Meiguoen, yes, American society more readily tolerates foreign-born people who speak non-standard English. English is a second or third language for them. And many of them strive very hard to learn to communicate decently in English. Whereas many native born people have a “kiss my ass” attitude about learning language skills. But that’s their problem; if they are willing to relegate themselves to menial work and to doom their progeny to the same, there’s not much anyone can do to help them. The resources are there for anyone that wants to use them.

          Are you suggesting that society should not only tolerate non-standard English, but even encourage its use?

          AR

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          Then they obviously aren’t that intelligent if they are not taking the time to work on and fix it. Just because it is “difficult” doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be changed.

      • Meiguoren says:

        Well Mr. Revol, I’m thinking we’ll have to agree to disagree.

        As a database administrator, I have several foreign born co-worker friends whose English is sometimes difficult to understand because of their nonstandard pronunciation and grammar, but it doesn’t get in the way of their ability to do their job well. This fact address the first comment that started this thread from Drained and Washed Clean who stated, “Spelling and grammar speak to ones intelligence.” It is clearly not a true statement based on my examples given and based on the cognitive scientific consensus, or perhaps you can find evidence that the scientific consensus agrees with the statement, “spelling and grammar speak to ones intelligence”, and then I will be proven wrong.

        In addition, I’ve also worked with homeless folks through my church. I see many of them are hard working people of average intelligence who speak non-standard English, and have been severely handicapped from succeeding for it. I am convinced that they could do the same job as my foreign co-worker friends and myself if given the educational opportunity and training.

        This is obviously just my opinion based on my experience. Perhaps your experience is different.

        • Atsap Revol says:

          Yes, it looks like we will have to disagree. If you look back at my initial post, you will see that I did not give unqualified support to D&WC’s statement. I did state that those who use non-standard English grammar and spelling may be (1) uneducated, (2) perhaps unintelligent, (3) definitely uncaring. I should have qualified that by saying this applies to those born in the US where there are opportunities to learn to communicate in our predominant langusge.

          Your anecdotal work experience demonstrates that skills are of greater value than language in some kinds of work. Those non-native personnel are locked into work that requires specific skills. It’s doubtful that they would ever be placed in supervisory, management, or public relations positions where communications are more important. Have you experienced calling for consumer technical support and being connected to “Outsourced Bob” in India or other foreign country? Too often “Bob’s” English is so poor that he can’t really understand your problem or help you solve it. We should not encourage such communication gaps in America.

          As for your reference to homeless people, you might ask why their English is so poor. If as you say they have average intelligence, why did they not improved their language skill? Probably when they were young they had the “kiss my ass” attitude about education and about standard English. Education is not as easy for some as it is for others because of their circumstances. I believe that Mal and I started in social circumstances that could have ended in homelessness if we had not bootstrapped our lives.

          I think we should just leave this as an ageement to disagree. We do agree that poor grammar and spelling do not automatically indicate lack of intelligence, although that could be one cause.

          AR

  6. Eric says:

    I suspect that the FSM movement is one of a number that is contributing to the great shift from intelligent variety of opinion to a couple homogenous, let-the-smart-people-with-agendas-do-my-thinking-for-me attitudes. I think it’s good to question why religion and religious experience is placed on a very high pedestal. I would also like to ask, then, why Science is even doing battle with religion. Who’s going to shine a light on the pedestal Science seems to be on these days?

    • Apprentice Frederic says:

      Looking thru different spectacles, it seems to me that the “smart” people with agendas that we need to be concerned about are typified by the Kansas School Board. And science (no capital “S”) really isn’t very interested in battling with religion, unless religion tries to push its agenda – creationism being one of the nuttier items there – as if it were “science”, too. Everyone is happy with scientists while they’re working out the genetics of cancer susceptibility, but for some reason the smart people with agendas get irritated if they point out either that all animals share a related genetic structure or that science doesn’t need to invoke the existence of a god (again, no capital “G”) to work out communication across the solar system or work out the solar system’s history. Scientists are their own most telling critics.

      • Eric says:

        Tru dat. I don’t think Science needs to invoke the existence of God. I don’t think it could. Ever. But if it can’t invoke, I don’t think it should be able to silence (I honestly don’t think FSM is trying to silence “god” in any way.) The problem I have is when Science seeks to topple all other metanarratives (I know… big word) but fails to see itself as a metanarrative with equally shaky assumptions and biases which, surprisingly, are usually quite under-examined. Do yourself a favor and google philosophy of science or Karl Popper and you’ll see… Science may not be the dry ground everyone thinks it is. OR, those who attribute their beliefs to the exploits of Science may be surprised at how many of their beliefs have never crossed paths with an actual Scientific inquiry (i.e., scientific method, falsification, etc).

        • Insightful Ape says:

          That is as idiotic as it gets. Science has predictive power, science WORKS. The difference between science and religion is more than a game of words.

        • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

          Exactly, Insightful Ape! Science has EARNED its stature. Religion has not; it bullies when it can and whines when it can’t.

    • Insightful Ape says:

      You do it yourself. Every time you use the Internet, you are indeed shining light on science and the pedestal it stands on. It was created by scientists, remember?

      • Eric says:

        I bet you call yourself postmodern. And I think you’re right in thinking that Science is more than words. In the same way, you can’t just SAY that everything else is just words too. You have to prove it. And, it would be nice if you could do it using Scientific methods.

        If you want to prove the superiority of Science over religion (a ridiculous undertaking, I admit), I dare you to do it scientifically. You can’t just say, “Science works, therefore religion is wrong, or bad, or inferior.” You have to prove that to me with some kind of scientific experiment. Give me some kind of Scientific law.

        Your replies to me only show that your belief that Science is superior to religion is based on more emotional than Scientific reasons. In fact, I want you to try to come up with a Scientific experiment that proves that Scientific explanations are always better than religious or mythological ones. Examine Science under its own lens.

        I know you won’t Insightful Ape. You’ve duped yourself so badly, you can’t even see the holes in your own boat. Is it better to look for holes that aren’t really there or ignore the holes that are sinking your ship?

        Better figure them out before you’re shipwrecked.

        • TiltedHorizon says:

          This morning I accidentally bumped the ironing board and watched as my ‘mass’ transferred kinetic energy to the board which in turn transferred energy to the Iron sitting on top causing it to fall off. Gravity took over, at which point the Iron’s motion stayed in motion until an unbalance force, Me, stopped it. The only explanation religion has to offer on these events is that the Iron fell as a direct result of my sinful life. I think science explains it better.

        • wulff says:

          How about the ancient religious belief that thunder and lightning were battles between the gods? Or the biblical belief that everything in the universe revolved around the Earth? I also seem to recall biblical stories of people who literally rose into the sky to heaven. Science has proven the causes of thunder and lightning. Science has proven that the only thing (naturally) orbiting the planet is the moon. Science has proven that if you ascend high enough, up no longer has any meaning, but there wasn’t any heaven in the clouds. The experiments that proved these things were all *far* superior to the religious explanations.

        • Insightful Ape says:

          Eh…you are the one saying science is just another metanarrative like religion, and I am the post modern one? You don’t even know what post modern means.
          Actually, yes, I can say that science works, so it is superior to religion. I won’t stop saying so because you don’t like it. The truth hurts, right?
          But since you want an example: the Internet was invented by scientists. It allows you to troll the web. Can theologians/ mystics come up with an equivalent to that?
          And speaking of shipwrecks, why didn’t all the prayers stop the Titanic from sinking, when science said it would?
          The fact that you keep trolling the web and trashing science tells me you are a hypocrite.
          And a word of advice: don’t throw in big words if you are so clueless, you’ll look stupid.

        • Apprentice Frederic says:

          Eric, just a couple of comments. First, thanks for your suggestion re: Karl Popper. Of course, I’ve seen books and references for years and years, but been too negligent to follow up. I’m not bowled over by the notion that “falsifiability” is all that crucial, but am probably not entitled to an opinion, and will try to pay attention. Worse yet (you’re gonna love this), I think “falsified” theories are still useful. One of many religionist/non-physicists’ favorite canards is: “Well, after all, Newton was wrong, wasn’t he?”. A second comment is merely that I was privileged many years ago to listen (as a geeky undergraduate) to Richard Feynman carrying on a quite civilized debate with a theologian. Feynman’s most telling question was: “Well….what are your results?”.

  7. Peter B says:

    The original hate mail is all a bit sad. I’m a committed Christian, but don’t believe that the earth is flat, created 6000 years ago or that Jesus will protect me if I choose to walk on a land mine. I do believe the bit about “love your neighbour as yourself”, and the bit about “let him without sin cast the first stone”. I found about CFSM through Kiva – keep up the good works, and keep up the humour! I love it, I love “Life Of Brian”, and God must have a sense of humour or why would he/she have started us all off with the big bang.
    PS (tongue in cheek) I do object to the comment about Bigger balls – it may be true if the Christian God is female (remember we are made in God’s image & half of the race is female), but if so, it is a very sexist thing to say. On the other hand, you are probably allowed an exemption as a religious organisation, just as some Christian priests seem to get away with their sins.

    • Peter B says:

      Oh, PS, I’m a scientist and science proves nothing about God, one way or another. I have no issues with athiests who see no logical point in God and I’m happy if they get as much out of whatever they choose do out of their Sunday mornings. Last I looked, it seemed that people with religious beliefs were on the whole happier than those without, but that’s just an average (and may just be in Australia). So if I die and that is the end of me, I’m happier along the way in my delusions. But if there is something bigger, I’ll be happy to welcome you to it when you arrive with a shocked face.

      • Former dupe of a more ridiculous religion says:

        I think it’s a shame that god cannot be proved to exist. Since he (apparently) talks to people and people talk to him he could be used as a communications relay station. Cheaper than mobile phone and no equipment needed.

        • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

          I wonder how the BuyBull-pounding conservatives would handle it when their god gave them advice or answers that were too liberal for them to accept?

        • wulff says:

          You mean like when Jeebus told his followers to give away all their worldly possessions and live off the charity of others? :)

      • m610 says:

        Regarding that happy religious person statistic before, I have seen it several times and it sounds like it is valid. But it also correlates with people who tend to see things in black and white, such as good vs evil, and so on, basically avoiding the details and the gray areas, nuanced thinking, etc. Think – happy idiot. It also correlates with tendencies towards tribalism, i.e., strong group identities, so the happy religious folk tend to not only not think deeply, they avoid situations/people that would cause them to consider other points of view. I’d think that would make for a happy life as long as they can remain in their bubble.

      • midnight rider says:

        Last you looked it seemed religious people were happer than non-religious people? Was this a survey? Can you send me a link? Or is this just personal opinion?

      • midnight rider says:

        Maybe Peter B will have the ‘shocked face’ when he arrives in the hall of the FSM and is sentenced to drink stale beer with old skanky toothless strippers because he failed to follow the one true religion of Pastafarianism! :)

      • Ferenst Anrtoplogist says:

        PETER B

        You make a good fucking piont. As a Ferenst Anrtoplogist, i two am a Sizentis (sp?), and i theink everywun is entilted to a dilusion or too. i dereive grete happines and satusfaction from my beleif that the philosfers stone will allow me too transmoute base metuls into gold.

        Thats the nise thing about beeing a Scizentis (sp?). You can screw around without produsing anytrhing and stil recieve the Nobell Prise. And, yes, it may bee that living in Austrailyuh has a lot to do with happines. ive never scene an unhappy Koala bare.

        With Regrds
        Ferenst Anrtoplogist, B.S., M.S., Ph.D. in Anrtoplogist

      • Drained and Washed Clean says:

        I don’t see how you can reconcile being a scientist and believing in god. You are right. There is no proof for god except what sheep herders made up in the bronze age. You being a scientist should realize that the burden of proof lies with those who make the claims. Yet, you believe in something that you have already admitted has no evidence. I am kind of questioning your scientific prowess…

      • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

        “it seemed that people with religious beliefs were on the whole happier than those without”.
        And the OPPOSITE seems to be the truth to me. Find some really troubled, angry people in this world and I’ll bet 10 -to- 1 they’re religious.

      • TiltedHorizon says:

        “it seemed that people with religious beliefs were on the whole happier than those without”

        I’m sure it seems that way, the question is, are they happy because they are religious or are they happy people who coincidentally happen to be religious?

        I believe it to be the latter. I was happy while I was Catholic & I am happy now, my faith or lack of it had no bearing on it.

    • Insightful Ape says:

      Science doesn’t say anything about god or FSM, but it does say something about mind/body dualism (and by extension, afterlife): it doesn’t exist. Nice bit of Pascal’s wager at the end, I am sure many Muslims would be happy to see you roast for ever and ever if it turned out god never had a son, but he did send a winged horse for prophet Mohammad to go meet him in person.
      Incidentally, the happiest nations in the world happen to be the godless Scandinavians (the recent massacre in Norway by a christian crusader not withstanding). Not that this has any bearing on the question being debated here, one way or another.

    • Specile Sicentis says:

      Peter B, I am only humman, and newly convrted to Xtnty, but I have to discus the piont of the respecdive balls.

      As a Specile Sicentis, it is my duty to calcalate the respecdive volumms and areas of G-d’s balls and the FSM’s. I have preyed to G-d and I am waiting for an answer as to the ridius and circumphrins of His balls, and I’m surtain I’ll find the FSM at the local so I’ll get His tomarrow. I’ll hve to wait until the Son of a Bich is drunk but I’ll get the data.

      Rember, it is’nt sexest to say because the piont is, their r manny grls out their with balls.

      Urs in sicents
      Specile Sicents A.D Specile Sicents (Servyeng Major)

      • Ferenst Anrtoplogist says:

        Dere Specile Sicentis,

        Good too sea you ar teaking on this specile progekt. You’re resalts wil finely reslove this isssue. It is knot be side the fucking piont on the mater of the siz of a dietie’s balls. Reserch by Ferenst Anrtplogists haz definitly shone that ball siz is korelatud with the omnplotuns and wholeyness of a god. Anxusly awayting yur resalts.

        Ferenst Anrtoplogist, B.S., M.S., Ph.D. in Anrtoplogy

      • Cap'n Flint says:

        These extreme examples of dyslexia remind me of a post seen on the wall of a public crapper:

        FIRST SCRIBE WROTE: “Fuck all you GRILS.”

        SECOND SCRIBE: Crossed out GRILS and inserted GIRLS above it.

        THIRD SCRIBE WROTE ON A NEW LINE BELOW: “Hey, how about us GRILS.”

        • Ferenst Anrtoplogist says:

          FLINT,

          Whats with this dislaxia shit? You shud knot insult intellijunt sicentis with such demening commence. As far as im conserned, you ar a Son of a Bich. im sur Specile Sicentis will agrree with my evaluashun.

          Ferenst Anrtoplogist, The Christian Anrtoplogist

      • Spcl Scnts says:

        Gd eveenjnning bichhs

        jessss beenn 2 tyhe pubhbb. Iz prtty druk bt tttok tappe mesuuerer to pbb an’ mdssure FMSes blls.

        iz Dmatrer ofv 0.355 mnm l;ft bll, anerd 00.36 rtgtbaall. Isd miore klike geuiod thren prtfect sphjere.

        Tooo drunmjk to caloc vlkumer. Mwaytbe not nheeed iuf -H-H’s diasmkerter baolls is sammnmnalkllerr. Y-W– nhot gyive infrmjssatiopn yt soe mustr preyy aghain.

        Scvheers!

        • Ferenst Anrtoplogist says:

          SPECILE, you hav carreed out you’re assignmunt above and beeyond the call of dooty. When yiou ar sobre enuff two make the calculashuns, pleas post them hear befour you publis in a refureeed jurnal. The wurld anxusly awates you’re resalts.

          You’re Koleague,
          Ferenst

        • Specile Sicentis says:

          Ferenst, and fellow sicentises.

          It gves me grate plesure to presant my drata on the FMSes ballses. They’re is 1 thng I nede 2 clere up 4 evurybody inspectically the sicentises umong us. The dmatrer is inn fcat 0.710 4 teh l;ft bll adn 0.720 4 teh rtgtbaall. Sorrey, I loost teh Kino tikkit I wroet taht on.

          Thairfour,

          L;ft bll: vlkumer 0.187m3, sycophants 2.23m, surfers’ aerial 1.58m2.
          Rtgtbaall: vlkumer 0.195m3, sycophants 2.26m, surfers’ aerial 1.63m2

          Theses r big baolls. I hve nevvr scene sch a diasmkerter onn a sett of nutts evr. Wear teh surfers’ aerial iz cornered, bare in mined tht the FMSes blls r infcatually geuiods whith ruff suffererses, & they’refour due hve a lager surfers’ aerial. Teh chneses of -H-H’s blls bing sammnmnalkllerr then tht r hgue.

          -a-w-h has knot answerded teh preyers 4 a masuuer. Purhaps tomarrow. Teh cour ov mi Xtnty iz frettened, as J-h-v-h sekes nott 2 answear.

          Ferenst, tregrether, we musst prey. We r only humman, bt we hve gaven hour feith 2 teh Lard!

          “Holey Lard, Sun of He tht Has nott Tayken teh Baoll Massue.

          Ur feythfull sicentises hve callinged there oan feilds 4 they’re feyth. We whunda wehn ur dad whill shoe us hiz blls.

          -H-H, J-h-v-h the R-d-e-e-, w-e-e teh p-o-p-e wannt ur baolls.

          Blamen”

          Specile Sicentis
          Teh Xtn Sicentis

        • Ferenst Anrtoplogist says:

          Specile Sicentis, good werk! i hav ricieved no addtional data from G-d, so looks lik the studee is at a standstill. If yu ever get the misssing data, yu kan apply the following formulae:

          Bfsm/Bg-d = PKG

          Where P = Power, K = Kingdom, and G = Glory

          Fourever, Ramen
          FA

    • Maggie says:

      I agree with you…sort of. The problem I have with FSM is that they show an utter disrespect for things that some people find to be very important.

      • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

        Maggie, if I found it very important to always wear my aluminum hat so the aliens couldn’t read my mind, would you respect that?

      • TiltedHorizon says:

        I can understand how your faith is important to you, I personally don’t have a problem with that, if faith inspires you to be better then kudos. The problem is, too many people think their personal faith should leap from the realm of “personal” to “public”. They hold the opinion that anyone who lives life outside of their faith is “less than”, inferior, abominable, heathens, and evil. So certain are they that they openly declare outsiders as evil enemy, using the same language and style of propaganda Hitler used to galvanize the masses against a common ‘threat’.

        I am sure you have seen some evidence of this, even if you have never held the opinions yourself. To be clear I acknowledge that not all believers hold such harsh views, they may even be the majority but their continued silence lets these others speak for them. Should we “evil heathens” stay silent too?

        One purpose of FSM (the other is to keep ID out of science class) is to demonstrate that anything can be a religion, even the absurd notion of a flying mass of pasta. If this ‘faith’ can be questioned than so can any other. One faith cannot be protected at the expense of all others.

  8. Bob says:

    Is it that hard to spell “you”? Or “your”?

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Yes.

1 5 6 7 8 9 27

Leave a Reply