PASTA!

#1 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account**

+5 123456789123345869

has deleted their comment [-]

#2 to #1 - DivineInfinity

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(02/28/2013) [-]

I'd be happier that he's a pretentious atheist than someone who actually believes in the flying spaghetti monster

#3 to #2 - bigbeaufort

Reply +2 123456789123345869

(02/28/2013) [-]

The institution of religion is simply believing in something greater than one's self. If he legitimately believed in the flying spaghetti monster then he would be doing what most religion does, devoting ones self to the worship of a higher being. If he was just being a pretentious atheist then he's a huge ass and I would prefer the aforementioned.

#6 to #3 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account**

0 123456789123345869

has deleted their comment [-]

#5 to #3 - DivineInfinity

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

I just think it's strange that religious people should have special rights. While it doesn't seem like much - surely not every religious person wears headgear and not everyone wearing something will make use of this exception - but it IS a privilige. Religion aims at uniting people, and as with all groups, people will feel more accepted and secure when being a part of it. Every group has it's rules. You don't go to your golf club wearing a gothic outfit, just as you don't visit a concert in a three-piece suit. I have seen women sollicitate and work wearing a Hijab. I respect her and her religion, but I can't but feel like I'm treated unfairly. Just like the rest of my age group I want to show what subculture I am part of. But I can't wear spikes or shirts with skulls on it to work. I have to wear clothes in which I feel uncomfortable, because they're not what I would wear when interacting with people of my (sub)culture. Yet only religious groups get priviliges. I am unsure where the difference lies, as we are all trying to find meaning in life through the lifestyle of our subculture. We should be able to express ourselves.

#7 to #5 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account**

0 123456789123345869

has deleted their comment [-]

#16 to #7 - coursicar

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(04/12/2013) [-]

i wear 98% black and 2% red, i love having skulls on my clothes, i wear a spiked bracelet on each wrist, and i wear a chain...

but i listen to country and dubstep...

#8 to #7 - DivineInfinity

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

What exactly makes the difference between religion and other groups? Because they're old? Keeping up with modern time has cost christianity alot of followers. Is it because serving your religion is a nobler cause? Or like you said, fear makes it worthy of extra attention? When something is sensitive to do, the decision lies with people: how will they treat that person. I believe it shouldn't be enforced by the authorities.

#9 to #8 - whyisthissohard **User deleted account**

0 123456789123345869

has deleted their comment [-]

#10 to #9 - DivineInfinity

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

You're turning cause and effect around. Because we believe in freedom of religion, it was taken up in your constitution. We don't believe in freedom of religion because it's in the constitution.

Also, freedom of religion doesn't say that your religion should be able to follow it's own rules. Female circumcision is illegal, for obvious and just reasons, although countless people are still performing it. Apparantly, this part of their faith does not fit within the main culture, and we are willing to deny them this part of their religion.

You stated that if you would form a religion around a band and people would take it seriously, you would accept their group as being religious. What are they worshipping? The band? Or a patron-god of bands? What you're saying here is that whenever someone "makes up" a cause or even a god, they could become a religion. By these rules, every group could become a religous group, like what happened to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

#17 to #10 - coursicar

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(04/12/2013) [-]

what is a "Female circumcision"? i thought a circumcision was when they remove extra skin from the penis... please explain, I've never heard of it.

#18 to #17 - DivineInfinity

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(04/12/2013) [-]

A female circumcision is when they cut of most of the clitoris and labia. This is to prevent women to have pleasure while having sex. This usually happens when the girl is 9, with the sharp kitchen knife. Because it's illegal in most countries, theres no way of getting medical help. The male circumcision is for hygienic reasons, which is understandable since the muslim and jewish faith was located in northern africa and middle east, where sand could get caught behind the foreskin and cause infections. The female circumcision is purely to make sure she does'nt have sexual pleasure.

#19 to #18 - coursicar

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(04/12/2013) [-]

why would someone do that? It's hard enough, as it is, to get them to put out. lol

#4 - ldial

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(02/28/2013) [-]

What does this accomplish....

#15 to #4 - anon id: 690799f3

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(04/11/2013) [-]

you obviously have no idea about pastafarianism!!!

#11 to #4 - renzard

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

Does it need to accomplish anything?

#12 to #11 - ldial

Reply 0 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

Yes...yes it does.

#13 to #4 - hazelnuttz

Reply -1 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

You seem to be missing the point. He is wearing a spaghetti strainer on his head in his id photo! He accomplished EVERYTHING

#14 to #13 - ldial

Reply +1 123456789123345869

(03/01/2013) [-]

But how much did he most likely have to invest in legal fees. Im not bashing him, just seems like he could've been doing something a little better. Like skyrim gear and claim worship of talos. or link and the 3 goddesses.....

Oo