Huh?

[The_Dog_Monster]

Hey guys! I wanted to ask: What is the FSM and what is the whole idea? I tried to read all those things about it in the START HERE board but I didn't seem to be able to understand it.

[Spatula]

All I can say is, if you dont get it keep reading.

[DeadPoet]

Try to read Bobby's letter ...

[The_Dog_Monster]

This thing seems to me like a joke, a joke that has been taken too far. Can someone confirm this?

[Al Dante]

Does it seem like a joke that religiously-motivated activists are attempting to legislate the intrusion of a specific religious opinion into public school science education curricula? No, that's not a joke. That's real, and it's important. And to the extent that Bobby's letter, Pastafarianism, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster are part of an effort to clarify the dimensions and implications of that situation in public debate, they're not a joke either.

Or do you mean things like pirate garb, beer volcanoes, and praying to a flying invisible pasta dinner? They might be a joke to some. For others they might be fervent heartfelt beliefs. How are you going to tell which, for whom? That's part of the point too. (The connection between personal freedom of conscience, and intellectually honest scientific inquiry, is fundamental but difficult to explain. Please forgive us if the point comes across as either too subtle, or too heavy-handed.)

As to taken too far... how far is too far?

Far enough to offend someone's deity? Any deity that takes offense at the content of this site is welcome to contact me in any of the myriad ways its defic powers must make possible. I would greatly welcome such contact. I'm sure most others here, including those in charge, would say the same.

Far enough to offend some other person on behalf of their deity? Ah, that I can't bring myself to worry about. First, if their deity is powerful enough to fear offending, then he/she/it should be able to take care of him/her/itself (see the previous paragraph). Second, I cannot possibly avoid offending people on behalf of their respective deities while living any sort of recognizable modern life. I do so every time I permit my wife to leave the house without her face covered, practically every time I eat a meal, and most of all, every time I worship my own deity of choice.

Far enough to trivialize, marginalize, or mock other people for their beliefs? Yes, that would indeed be too far. Which is why it's strictly against policy here to do so, except in specific forums which are clearly marked as open to such content and which those who want to avoid the risk of offense can easily avoid.

So on what basis could one say that the subject matter of this site has been taken "too far?" If the above hasn't answered your question, perhaps you could clarify that point, as the basis for further discourse.

- Al

[Sir Francis Drake]

RAmen, Mr. Al!

[The_Dog_Monster]

Al Dante,

I didn't say it offends any deity I believe in, as I personally am a atheistic person. My point is, the fact that somebody believes in a flying spaghetti monster makes laugh, as it sounds unreasonable. Plus, I really do think this whole thing was invented as a huge joke. Oh, BTW, I didn't understand what you meant when you talked about that school thing in your post: "Does it seem like a joke that religiously-motivated activists are attempting to legislate the intrusion of a specific religious opinion into public school science education curricula? No, that's not a joke. That's real, and it's important. And to the extent that Bobby's letter, Pastafarianism, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster are part of an effort to clarify the dimensions and implications of that situation in public debate, they're not a joke either. "

That's all for now. I'm waiting for a response.

[Sir Francis Drake]

I believe the word you're looking for is "satire". The Flying Spaghetti Monster was created as a clever satire. It was meant to be ridiculous. It was meant to make people think outside the box about religion.

Bobby could easily have talked about God and what God wants, etc., but that had been done before. The problem was that people hear "God" and assume it's THEIR God being discussed, and seeing as God is a very personal entity, people instinctively start pushing for their particular God's agenda. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is meant to be so outlandish that it gets you thinking about religion in a more objective way, so that you may come to a better understanding about what the argument of Creationism vs. Evolution is really all about.

Does this help at all?

[Al Dante]

Hi TDM,

If it makes you laugh, then laugh. Really. If we didn't want people to laugh we wouldn't use the word "noodly" so much. "Noodly" is a funny word, isn't it? "Noodly noodly noodly noodly!" And combine that with "appendage" and you've got comic gold. "Noodly appendage! Noodly appendage!" How could anyone not laugh?

But if you want to really understand what this is all about, you should read Bobby Henderson's open letter to the Kansas School Board. Like the Start Here information you claim you've read told you to do. Like the moderator's post (DeadPoet's post) above told you to do. Perhaps you didn't notice that the pale blue text indicates a link to click on. So I'll be more explicit: to read Bobby's letter, just click this sentence to go to the home page and read the main text on that page.

The reason Bobby's letter is important in understanding this site is that the letter is how the Flying Spaghetti Monster got started. Bobby invented the Flying Spaghetti Monster when he wrote the letter.

And "that school thing" as you put it -- the issue of whether an idea called Intelligent Design should be taught as science in public schools -- is what Bobby's letter is about.

Some of the most likely reasons why Bobby chose to refer to a Flying Spaghetti Monster in the letter to make his point about teaching Intelligent Design in science class, Sir Francis Drake just explained pretty well in the previous post.

Any clearer now?

- Al

[Sir Francis Drake]

Well put, Al.

Furthermore, some of us have adopted the Flying Spaghetti Monster as our real religion because we feel that religious tolerance is something that a truly all-encompassing Creator would want, yet few religions seem to stress. Also, those of us who choose to truly believe do so with the idea that any real God would be so totally beyond what we could grasp as mortals that it doesn't matter what imagery we choose as a symbol to worship (It or Him or Her or Them or Me or You), as we'd likely be wrong in the end anyway, and any omnipotent God would have the sense and mercy to forgive us for doing so. Yeay FSM!

[NeferKa]

If we didn't want people to laugh we wouldn't use the word "noodly" so much. "Noodly" is a funny word, isn't it? "Noodly noodly noodly noodly!" And combine that with "appendage" and you've got comic gold. "Noodly appendage! Noodly appendage!" How could anyone not laugh?

I'm laughing...

Anyway, good job stressing the points of tolerance, everyone. I personally like Pastafarianism because it requires it's members to be empathetic, yet keep a sense of humor. I don't see how having a Deity as an anthropomorphic wad of noodles is any less believable than having a Deity as an old man with a beard.

[The_Dog_Monster]

Thanks for explaining it to me (By the way, I did read the letter so there was no need for you to give me a link to it). If it matters to anybody, my opinion is that it is ridiculous to combine science with intelligent design (or whatever you call it). Here in Israel (Yes, that's where I live), both subjects are seperated, and that's what they should do all over the world.

[cemtech]

Absolutely, but here in the United States, we have an activist faction that want their religion taught in schools under the guise of science. Their faith is so poor, they are trying to find scientific evidence for such. But, the best they can do is make it up, take out of context quotes, and decieve others as to what science is. Makes you wonder which diety they are worshipping.

[Griffin]

Also, those of us who choose to truly believe do so with the idea that any real God would be so totally beyond what we could grasp as mortals that it doesn't matter what imagery we choose as a symbol to worship (It or Him or Her or Them or Me or You), as we'd likely be wrong in the end anyway, and any omnipotent God would have the sense and mercy to forgive us for doing so. Yeay FSM!

4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:

The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2000. The Second Book of Moses, Called Exodus 20 The Ten Commandments Deut. 5.1-21

Clarification saught. I thought Pastafaianis was compatible with all other religions. Now I am filled with doubt.

[Entropy]

So I guess that also means we'll have to burn any pictures, movies, scultures, food items, or assorted parapharnalia that looks like any sort of sealife (and I'm only using that line). If a "no Idols" clause surprises you, you've never heard of Islam or the Jyllands-Posten Controversy.