Talk:Flying Spaghetti Monster

Edit request to address being a parody or satire not precluding being a religion

A small edit request or discussion. Instead of classifying Pastafarianism only as a social movement, I would request that it be delineated as a religion in the initial description. There does not appear to be a barrier to classification of a religion simply because it may be satire, parody, or that some people would rather it just not be called a religion. Wikipedia has no qualms about listing other parody religions as religions (see Jediism, others). In other words, if a religion is satirical, it is still a religion. If a religion is a parody, it is still a religion. It would easily be argued that the two concepts are not related, satire and parody being a variable, religion being a completely different variable. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.168.2 (talk) 17:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Based on what sources?Charles (talk) 17:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

I think "religion" should be defined first. Then, if it fits the definition, classify Pastafarianism as such. Liberty5651 (talk) 18:02, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

That would be WP:OR. The only thing that matters is what reliable secondary sources say.

Pastafarianism: The Newest Dutch Religion

Spaghetti injunction: Pastafarianism is not a religion, Dutch court rules

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster breaks another milestone in New Zealand

Jedis And Pastafarians: Real Religion Or Just A Joke?

Is Pastafarianism a real religion?

Court to spaghetti: You are not a god

--Guy Macon (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

There is no consensus on what constitutes exact parameters on what a religion is, or is not. The religion wiki page states so. The articles Guy Macon offer are mostly from reliable sources, but focus primarily on NZ and Dutch legal decisions. Some countries require legal authority to be a recognized religion. Some reliable sources term the FSM as a religion. Others don't. There is no absolute consensus across all reliable sources on whether FSM is a religion. Likewise, there is no evidence that legal recognition is required for something to be real (i.e., same sex marriage has occurred for centuries, but has only recently been recognized by some countries. Prior to legal recognition, same-sex marriage still existed). For a Wiki, to offer that some beliefs are religious and others are not, based upon unrelated opinion (parody, satire, etc.) is discriminatory. Perhaps an allegory could be made that if a page on Islam were edited to state that it is not a religion, as some reliable sources (perhaps some Christian based publications) state that it is not a religion. Such an example is extreme, of course, but to the larger point. FSM as a religion cannot be denied simply because some individuals think it is a parody or if it is indeed a parody (as per reference to Jediism above). I don't believe it is the job of a wiki to discriminate.

https://www.ulc.org/ulc-blog/about-the-church-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/church-of-the-flying-spaghetti-monster-conducts-first-legal-wedding-new-zealand-a6987971.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/01/us/pasta-strainer-license-photo-trnd/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.168.2 (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Where were these courts 2000 years ago as Christianity developed into a religion, or 3000+ years ago when all manner of gods and creatures were worshiped as religions? Because we have current religions means to worship shouldn't preclude new ones from forming. Liberty5651 (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

 Comment: What about the court of Pontius Pilate 2,000 years ago which ruled what was and what was not a religion? — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:08, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

That's good, diverse, source material. Liberty5651 (talk) 13:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Merrian Webster on Religion: (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural, (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a religion and this encyclopedia should reflect as such. Opinions of a few random journalists cannot change reality. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion Clifford Geertz, one of the most famous and influential anthropologists of all time, notes that religion is defined as a special system of symbols that establishes powerful "moods and motivations" in people, formulates a "general order of existence", makes these conceptions appear as fact, makes these moods and motivations seem "uniquely realistic". Geertz, C. (1965). Religion as a Cultural System In Reader in Comparative Religion, William A. Lessa and Evon Z. Vogt. Clearly the FSM does all these things, as evidenced even in the journalists depictions provided thusfar. Emile Durkheim, one of the pinnacle sociologists of all time and a primary researcher on religion, defines religion as; "...a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden – beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them." Durkheim, É. From The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912). Again, clearly FSM does all these things. Formal request to edit initial sentences to the following: "The Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) is the deity of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or Pastafarianism. Pastafarianism (a portmanteau of pasta and Rastafarianism) is a religion that opposes the teaching of intelligent design and creationism in public schools. Pastafarians believe the tenets of the FSM provide a general order of existence, believe their conceptions to be fact, and are unified in belief under sacred practices of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster." The two subsequent statements should be moved to the legal status portion of the article and have no business in the introduction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.168.2 (talk) 16:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2019 - Wording on marriage celebrants in New Zealand

Hello! I would like to change this section of the first paragraph under "Legal status"

In New Zealand, Pastafarian representatives have been authorized as marriage celebrants, however members of other movements considered to be "alternative philosophies" rather than religions are also recognized as celebrants under New Zealand law.

To this:

In New Zealand, Pastafarian representatives have been authorized as marriage celebrants, however members of any organisation deemed to uphold or promote religious beliefs or philosophical or humanitarian convictions may be accepted as an approved organisation under New Zealand law.

Justification

The section on marriage talks about "movements" with "alternative philosophies" that are accepted by New Zealand law. This is pretty good, and it draws directly from the existing reference material, but I think we could be a little more precise in what exactly is accepted by NZ law.

We have two kinds of celebrant in New Zealand: individual celebrants and organisational celebrants. For the purposes of this article, we're only interested in the latter. To be more consistent with the definitions, I think we should use the term "organisations" rather than "movements" and we should use the wording from the relevant legislation rather than the "alternative philosophies" quote from before. What do you think?

Thanks!

(PS: This is my first content contribution to Wikipedia, so I'm sorry if I got the format wrong or I've raised this in the wrong place! Please let me know and I'll try to get it right next time.)

Garethsime (talk) 12:12, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: @Garethsime:: Thanks for your contribution! I've edited the article along your lines, but with a different wording because the word "however" implies there's some sort of contradiction, which the sources don't seem to bear out. What do you think to the change of wording? Sceptre (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2019

I think we should remove it. It's very wrong, and fake. Sanjay2133 (talk) 15:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. See WP:AFD for the process to propose deleting an article. However, being real or fake isn't the standard, it's whether or not it's notable, which the FSM clearly is. We have an article on the Tooth Fairy despite it not being real. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Not to disagree with the thrust of your argument, but the Tooth Fairy is as real as the Jesus depiction, any of the Buddhas, the FSM, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.125.168.2 (talk) 20:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2019

The text following the (appropriately) italicized "The Loose Canon, the Holy Book of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster" continues to be italicized. The source needs to be with the appropriate end italics mark

 Done Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 00:04, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2019

the flying spaghetti's monsters children is Jesus Moses and we are all his "children" 204.116.211.125 (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2019 (UTC)