the flying spaghetti monster? a way to mock religion?

Question

A badly qouted Fernando Pessoa, I remember a passage which went something like, 'How can I believe in humanity, when it mocks religion the most intimate of all my possesions." Am I supposed to respect the works of men like Richaed Dawkins who stab at my fundamental beliefs with no thought of others and their beliefs. We have no absolute proof of Evolution, why do extreme athiests try to sway my opinion by creating a so-called god which is aimed at trying to insult my core-values. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.

when i said of evolution i did not mean micro evolution, i meant inter-species evolution.

Answer 1

Everyone in life needs some laughter, and rather than intending to offend, the FSM is supposed to be funny. Yes of course, some people will be offended, sadly that's the way of the world and I'm sorry it's offended you (as it seems to have.)

I may not speak for everyone, but as an atheist who has possibly offended you with this joke-deity, I'm sincerely sorry.

It was invented kind of as a way for us to set up a mock-religious structure. When it comes down to it, we don't understand Christians. We just don't. We're both looking at the same book, the same concept, the same language...but it's like we're wearing different colored glasses.

We don't understand "faith" in a deity. Because when the information came into OUR heads, our "nowai!" alarm went off. Whereas you folks are inspired and content.

Neither way is wrong. But it honestly does have a lot of us atheists scratching our heads. Kind of the way I'm sure a lot of religious people do when we try to explain we live life just fine without worrying about a supreme being.

And yes, like anything, some people will use the FSM and other jokes for very harsh intents, and again. Sorry. ^.^;;

Answer 2

the flying spaghetti monster doesn't mock religion overall, it simply mocks creationism. Although actually, its primary purpose isn't even to do that - Pastafarianism was devised as a way of pointing out the fallacy of asking our laws to favor one form of religious belief over another. In other words, if christians can request that creationism be taught in school based on no rationale other than religious belief, then why not demand that Pastafarianism be taught as well? After all, what makes one religious belief more legitimate than another? That's the whole point behind the flying spaghetti monster.

I'd like to challenge your assertation that there is no "absolute proof" of evolution. Why is the burden of proof on science? The thing is, science, based on its terminology, will never claim "absolute proof" for anything which was not observed and quantifiably measured at the time it occurred. By definition, we cannot "absolutely prove" what may have happened historically if we were not there. However, in scientific terminology, a "theory" is the very closest thing to an absolute proven fact, as anything that exists. Once something qualifies as a theory, it's pretty much esteemed to be a fact. Kind of like the Theory of Gravity - it's just a theory, but come on, it's a fact. Read up about this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory#Science

Answer 3

See how the great prophet of the FSM, Bobby Henderson, based this faith: Flying Spaghetti Monster right this is a quote from the object in Wikipedia, the unfastened encyclopedia: "The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a deity of a parody faith based by using laptop scientist Bobby Henderson in 2005" Wow. So the FSM is in elementary terms a pair of twelve months old, and replaced into based as a PARODY faith!! Parody From Wikipedia, the unfastened encyclopedia In modern utilization, a parody is a artwork that imitates yet another artwork with the intention to ridicule, satirically remark on, or poke affectionate exciting at the two the artwork itself, the problem of the artwork, or yet another concern (Hutcheon). Parody exists in all paintings media, consisting of literature, song, and cinema. Cultural strikes can be parodied. Such works are additionally now and lower back colloquially talked approximately as spoofs. After analyzing the above recommendations, i will in elementary terms end that the FSM is the introduction of a guy named Bobby Henderson, who replaced into annoyed that Kansas had observed clever layout into the college curriculum. The FSM replaced into meant as a parody of the Christian God. i'm stunned and saddened.......

Answer 4

1- You are wrong. Evolution has been proven. Over and over. But even if we didn't have the slightest idea that doesn't imply that it had to be magic.

2- How would you react if you met an adult that honestly believed in faeries or Santa? That is exactly how we feel. It is hard not to laugh at it.

3- Religion has proven dangerous over the years. So frankly we aren't looking for respect from the ones that are really to far gone.

Answer 5

It's not an insult to your values unless you worship spaghetti.

If you believe your religion should be taught in science class in the interest of fairness then in the interest of fairness ALL RELIGIONS should get an equal shot in the science class, even the religion you disagree with.

If Creationism is taught in secular schools "to be fair" then so must Theogony, Indigenous beliefs, Hinduism and, yes, the Flying spagetti monster.

This would, of course, leave no room for the science, and explain why I, as a scientist, can't find a single AMERICAN to take my position and when I leave my current science job will most assuredly be replaced by someone from China.

Walk into an American science lab and listen to the languages being spoken by the staff. Good luck finding English.

By the way, when YOU try to put Creationism in the Science classroom you are doing to my beliefs what you claim the FSM does to yours...if you don't like it, maybe you should stop.

Edit: Dear, when two samples of fruit flies are separated for 300 generations and can no longer interbreed, they *are* new species. This has been proven and replicated, and replicated. It's not my fault you don't know the definition of SPECIES. Seriously, look it up.
My religion teaches me to LOOK AT THE NATURAL WORLD to learn about it, yours tells me to look away...why are you attacking my beliefs?

Answer 6

1.) It wouldn't be so easy for Dr. Dawkins to "stab at (your) fundamental beliefs" if they had a shred of empirical evidence to back them up.

2.) We DO have absolute proof of evolution -- nothing we observe in biology, comparative anatomy, geographic distribution of species, genetics, and myriad other disciplines makes any sense without the underlying metaprinciple of evolution to explain it. The fact that you refuse to educate yourself in these matters does not change this.

3.) The Flying Spaghetti Monster is what we call "demonstrating absurdity by being absurd".

Answer 7

The FSM was created to make a point about teaching Intelligent Design in public schools-- there is no basis to take one creation myth over another. The FSM has as much validity as ID. Don't pretend that religion is science and you won't have to deal with rebuttals.

Answer 8

The FSM started as an attempt to keep the (IIRC) Kansas City Board of Education from mandating the teaching of Intelligent Design in biology classes, not as an attempt to mock religion. It has, I'll grant, evolved since then - or shouldn't I use that word?

Answer 9

No absolute proof of evolution?

Fine. Not all the gaps are filled yet but there is a lot of proof--enough for it to be considered proven to be true.

It's not exactly to mock religion--it was because the Kansas school board, if I remember correctly, decided to teach creationism in school.

Answer 10

How dare you mock my beliefs! The FSM (bless His noodly appendage) is real!

All joking aside, he was not created by Dawkins; Dawkins just references it. The FSM's purpose was a noble one, at least in my opinion. His creator proved a point using humor rather than hatred. http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/