While I can understand not allowing an inflatable cutlass, I'm kind of undecided about the eye patch thing. I haven't been in high school in five years so I don't know how much of a disturbance it would be. I feel like it'd be something people would just get used to seeing and probably isn't as disturbing as some of the things people wear. Thoughts?
Posts: 2867 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure how I feel about the decision.
On the one hand, I think the student's right.
On the other hand, were I a teacher, I wouldn't appreciate a seeing student wearing an eyepatch in class any more than I'd appreciate a walking student using a wheelchair in school. It is disruptive and distracting.
On the other, other hand, I have little tolerance for people who go out of their way to meaninglessly provoke the system like this.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why are you so ready to say that his particular faith is meaningless? You would certainly never do so for a Mormon, Moslem, or Mennonite.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The kid got just what he wanted. It was hilarious and I'm sure he and his friends are laughing about it right now.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's disruptive and distracting for about five minutes until everyone who has better things to do gets over it, clearly the Assistant Principal was having a slow day.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
An eyepatch does not seem any more disruptive or distracting than a burka or a turban.
Edit to add: I'm not even sure about the inflatable cutlass. He's making an excellent point, or at least from my perspective he would if he were in Canada. There was a recent ruling that allowed Canadian Sikhs to carry daggers to school based on their religion. linkPosts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
But if he really believes in it, then not being allowed to express himself in this particular way is illegal (well, maybe not the cutlass, and probably they could even ban the eye patch, but he should be allowed to wear SOME form of pirate regalia.)
Of course, I doubt he REALLY believes it but he would never admit that. And the point is moot. If Christian students are allowed to wear crosses and Jewish students are allowed to wear yarmulkes, then Pastafarian students should be allowed to wear Pirate regalia of some sort.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The inflatable cutless aside, his mistake was not sticking to his guns. He should have been fully prepared to wear that patch to school, or anywhere else in public, every single day thereafter.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why are you so ready to say that his particular faith is meaningless? You would certainly never do so for a Mormon, Moslem, or Mennonite.
I'll spring for this obviously loaded question. Questions of legality aside, people would say his faith is meaningless* because it was manufactured, and done so very recently in fact, specifically as a whimsical or ironic reflection of other religions.
*insofar as it's meant to be believed in as other religions are believed in.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about a Muslim girl who doesn't really believe in her religion, but wears a burqa because she is expected to? Or what if a girl who isn't a Muslim decides to wear a burqa because she wants the shade? What criterion is being used to draw the line? The student's level of faith? The ridiculousness of the ideas being believed in? Perhaps the religion must be officially recognised as such by the government and be applicable for the relevant tax-breaks.
Some would say that Mormonism too is a recent invention.
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:What about a Muslim girl who doesn't really believe in her religion, but wears a burqa because she is expected to? Or what if a girl who isn't a Muslim decides to wear a burqa because she wants the shade? What criterion is being used to draw the line? The student's level of faith? The ridiculousness of the ideas being believed in? Perhaps the religion must be officially recognised as such by the government and be applicable for the relevant tax-breaks.
Some would say that Mormonism too is a recent invention.
OK, first of all, I'm not going to bother addressing talk about government and tax breaks, since I specifically said "questions of legality aside".
As for what criterion is being used to draw the line, well the question I was replying to was:
quote:Why are you so ready to say that his particular faith is meaningless? You would certainly never do so for a Mormon, Moslem, or Mennonite.
With the implication of "you" not being just erosmniac, but people of faith everywhere.
And the answer to that question is very simple. The chances of finding a Pastafarian who is really a Pastafarian in the sense that they pray to the FSM or something, have some sort of faith in Pastafarianism, etc., is so small as to be negligible. Perhaps you could find someone who truly was a sincere Pastafarian in a religious sense, but it would certainly be a tiny, tiny minority.
The same is not true of other religions which are, you know, actual religions. Despite how foolish you think it is to believe in one, a great many people do believe in religions, and if you find someone wearing a cross or a burkha, chances are they have at least some level of religious faith in the belief system behind their particular outward symbol.
The same cannot* be said of a Pastafarian. Thus, the label of 'meaningless'. Not a very difficult thing to understand at all, unless one is more interested in pointing out that all religions are equally unprovable, instead of stating a straightforward objection to the original observation.
*Cannot, or some likelihood very close to zero.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
The purpose of Pastafarianism is to make a point; that science's inability to disprove one god doesn't make that god any more likely to exist than a ridiculous entity like the FSM. Pastafarians' lack of 'faith' doesn't make the mock religion meaningless.
And frankly, we don't have a way to determine whether someone who claims to believe something actually believes it. There are cults with ostensibly ardent believers, with 'uniforms' that would be disruptive if worn to school.
Does the number of subscribers to a religion really matter? Should we respect unfounded beliefs based on how many people believe them?
posted
Upon further thought, the only way this kid could convince me that he's doing this as a measure of his religious beliefs is by wearing the pirate regalia all day, every day, and by providing references to Pastafarian doctrine indicating where it suggests this is necessary.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: I'm not sure how I feel about the decision.
On the one hand, ...
On the other hand, ...
On the other, other hand, ...
On the other, other, hand!? A Freudian slip by a saucy pagan, indicating a belief in the many-tendriled FSM?
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:people would say his faith is meaningless* because it was manufactured, and done so very recently in fact,
So what? He could very well believe in it for all that. After all, precisely the same criticism could have been made of Christianity around 40 AD, supposing you did not believe in it.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: This article is much better, simply for the picture of Jack Sparrow with the caption, "A man in full pirate regalia."
posted
That kid would be my hero...if it weren't for the fact that I'm a NINJA!!!
I'm like to try ninja regalia at school someday...although I'm in college so the same rules wouldn't apply to me...
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: Upon further thought, the only way this kid could convince me that he's doing this as a measure of his religious beliefs is by wearing the pirate regalia all day, every day, and by providing references to Pastafarian doctrine indicating where it suggests this is necessary.
Why does it matter whether he sincerely believes it or not?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:*insofar as it's meant to be believed in as other religions are believed in.
I don't understand why you're ignoring my qualifiers.
Apologies for the first half of that post. Though I don't understand why you ignored the second half.
quote:And frankly, we don't have a way to determine whether someone who claims to believe something actually believes it. There are cults with ostensibly ardent believers, with 'uniforms' that would be disruptive if worn to school.
Does the number of subscribers to a religion really matter? Should we respect unfounded beliefs based on how many people believe them?
Would the pirate costume be okay if the kid honestly believed in a spaghetti monster?
Posts: 1762 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see an issue with an inflatable cutlass. It's inflatable. What's he going to do, beat someone over the head with it? A backpack is more dangerous for that..
posted
I used to frequent the FSM forums and I am here to bear my testimony that there are many true believers in Pastafarianism. Anyway, why shouldn't it be true? We're told that there are many mansions. Why can't one have a beer volcano and stripper factory? One of the faithful over there was once making fun of baptisms for the dead, and I described it to him thusly, that after a few millennia lying around beside the beer volcano someone might fly through and drop a "get into Mormon heaven free" pass on his lap. That he could then be free to check it out or else toss it in file 13. He was gratified at that and seemed to like the idea.
They did a poll and something over half of the pastafarians who responded answered that they were true believers. I think it's a great religion! It appeals to a subset of folks that no other religion can reach, and its an introduction of a sorts. Also, there really are quite a few aspects of God that are infinitely noodly.
So yes, I think this fellow should be encouraged in his religion, and allowed to wear the holy garments that go along with it.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reads the first article...realizes that's where he's from. Yeah...Did I mention I was in home-school?
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
My friend jon wore a ninja mask to school and was upset because no one even did a double-take. I once wore a gateway box to school (through the whole day) with a sign on it that said "thank you for thinking outside the box," and also got in zero trouble, despite the fact that the box was pretty big and covered my entire head when I was sitting at a desk (how did they think I was taking notes?).
Some schools are pretty okay with this sort of thing, I suppose.
Posts: 247 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
HOLY CRAP. The kid says he got his inflatable sword from the Happy Meal...SO DID I.
He has the same inflatable sword that I have from the time that Pirates of the Caribbean was featured of the Mac Donald's thing!
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just found the kid on MySpace and sent him a message telling him he's my hero. Let's hope he replies soon.
Posts: 3389 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's his myspace address? This is an increasingly interesting topic. I don't have a problem with what the kid did. If it's a religious issue for you, then step back and realize that the kid is not trying to insult your religion, or any religion. He is simply trying to express himself in what he considers to be a funny manner.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pH: I don't see an issue with an inflatable cutlass. It's inflatable. What's he going to do, beat someone over the head with it? A backpack is more dangerous for that..
-pH
It's not that it's actually a weapon, but that it resembles or imitates a weapon, not because people could get hurt but because they could appear to promote violence. It's the idea of it. My school district banned all weapons, objects imitating weapons, and objects closely resembling weapons from school. We couldn't even have sword toothpicks on our fruit tray. While I thought the implementation was a bit bizzare, I thought the theory was good.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: We're told that there are many mansions. Why can't one have a beer volcano and stripper factory?
That just gave me a vision of heaven, and tears have come to my eyes. I do believe I have seen the light of a thousand poles being swung from at once.
Posts: 1170 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not saying that there's not a place for inflatable cutlasses. Just that school is not that place.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I went through a phase where I wore aviator sunglasses to school every day for about 2 months. I wore them all day--in class and everything, and it wasn't until a teacher who didn't know me told me to take them off that it became an issue. She thought that I might have been getting high and trying to hide it with the sunglasses. (Note: While I was difficult and rebellious, I still finished top 20 in my class and had a pristine disciplinary record--never doing anything to cross the line).
None of my other teachers had a problem with it--it's not like we had to wear uniforms. Unfortunately, school codes of conduct are set up so that students have absolutely no rights at all, so if a teacher asks you to do something, you do it and appeal later.
Meaning--the pastafarian kid got suspended for what my teachers called "non-compliance", which was blanket term they added on to every write-up to make the punishment worse. If he had simply done what he was told and appealed later, I think he'd be allowed to wear the eyepatch today.
My personal opinions: I'm all for school uniforms and strict, strict rules all through adolescence. Too much of our educational system today is built on inflating self-esteem and individual freedoms instead of education.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's not that it's actually a weapon, but that it resembles or imitates a weapon, not because people could get hurt but because they could appear to promote violence. It's the idea of it. My school district banned all weapons, objects imitating weapons, and objects closely resembling weapons from school. We couldn't even have sword toothpicks on our fruit tray. While I thought the implementation was a bit bizzare, I thought the theory was good.
Yeah, I got in trouble for wearing a James Bond shirt in high school, cause bond was holding a gun. I thought it was pretty silly, but I still turned the shirt inside out, cause in school, you can get in trouble for absolutely anything.
It's kinda like getting a PI. You don't have to be intoxicated, just in public and annoying an officer. If you really weren't drunk, you won't get any further punishment, but you still spent the night in jail.
But I'm still sticking with my theory that the kid got exactly what he wanted.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
"He is simply trying to express himself in what he considers to be a funny manner."
I disagree with this, to an extent. When I see things of this nature, I can't help but simply think that people are mocking religion. I believe he was trying to make a point, trying to push the boundries as much as he can, but at the expense of mocking a religious group to do so.
I guess I'm just really upset that a joke has now become the medium to present a cool way to openly mock religious viewpoints, and more so, when people cheer it on, all I can hear is "yeah, it's really great to mock peoples beliefs". I really shouldn't be upset, though. I've been trying to let it go, but it keeps sitting hard on me.
I mean, for all I know, the kid had no intention of mocking a particular religion, and was just being silly. On the other hand, I can't understand how someone can come to know about FSM and not understand the intent when first thought of.
I've never been an atheist, or agnostic, so I can't say if this is how it feels or not when dealing with religious people. I really need to let this go.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I mean, for all I know, the kid had no intention of mocking a particular religion, and was just being silly. On the other hand, I can't understand how someone can come to know about FSM and not understand the intent when first thought of.
I've never thought of FSM as mocking religion. I thought it was mocking laws that make exceptions to rules for religions. Such as, if you're going to make a law that says Religion A's version of humanities history must be taught in school, then you really aught to teach every religion's version, and that would be ridiculous.
I don't know if what the kid did falls under this umbrella as well, but I just wanted to point out that not all appreciators of FSM, and cheerers of the student are mocking religion.
quote:Originally posted by T_Smith: On the other hand, I can't understand how someone can come to know about FSM and not understand the intent when first thought of.
I have to disagree with you on this point, I think it's quite possible for someone (especially an adolescent) to happen upon pastafarianism and just think it's funny that there's a "religion" that revolves around an invisible flying spaghetti monster and pirates, without really delving into it's source as a slight against religion in general.
That being said, I wouldn't be suprised either way.
The problem I see with the "obey now, appeal later" mantra is that it could get into the realm of sin to obey (depending on the religion and practice). (can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but just say that FSM declared not wearing your eyepatch 24/7 to be punishable by exclusion from the stripper factory...) should we yield to secular authority in the face of divine retribution? Obviously I would expect a more serious issue like this to be pushed by the student rather than immediately capitulating, but I've known teachers that most likely would not give in.
actually, I just thought of a half-way decent example: Required physicals/innoculations for schools and Christian Science... I'm guessing there is something in place since this would come down to an administrative issue rather than a teacher telling a student to do something immediately, but it illustrates the general principle.
P.S. Eros, either you are a mutant with multiple hands (kinda cool) or one of them is somewhat hypocritical... I think you need to do some soul, er hand-searching =p
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Edit: To Vonk Perhaps so, and I can see your point. It's not as if every religious person has been kind enough to respect the beliefs of another.
I really feel, though, as if he did this as an attempt to have religious symbols that students carry with them be taken away, rather than to express his beliefs in a FSM. That's what bothers me. I see it as atheist vs theists, and someone is trying to score a point against religion by making an example out of the symbols of their faith.
If he truly believed in a FSM, than I really wouldn't have a problem with the eyepatch and such. But since I see the idea behind the parody religion as a mockery instead of a true idea of the nature of life, I don't believe he believes.
Like I said, though, I'm too worked up over this, and to be frank, it's stupid enough that I shouldn't have even thought about it.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess I'm just really upset that a joke has now become the medium to present a cool way to openly mock religious viewpoints,
If you do not wish to be mocked, you should present some evidence showing that your religion is less ridiculous than the FSM.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
T_Smith, I'm trying to sympathize with you on this.
I know that people hold things to be sacred, and attacking that which is sacred provokes a powerful emotional response.
Even if the FSM is intended to be offensive, it's not something you should worry about. Maybe it would help if you remind yourself that God and religion are both big enough to handle themselves, and you don't need to worry about defending them or taking offense for them?
I know it's hard, but you'll have to accept that there are things you feel are sacred that other people won't even be able to conceive of treating as sacred.
I don't know the proper response for when someone insults something you hold sacred. I lack social skills, and I would be tempted to suggest "turning the other cheek" in this case.
However, I recently ran into a similar problem at work. I am an atheist, and the only thing I hold to be sacred is sex, and the close relationship between people. As a result of this, I don't laugh at crude sexual jokes, because in my mind, they are taking something beautiful, something sacred to me, and making it ugly. Taking offensive at this kind of thing is very much a reflex for me.
I take offense when my co-workers mistreat women or treat sex flippantly. I tell myself, "Well, their beliefs aren't the same as mine. What can I do besides not participate?" As a result, I am slightly outcast.
Sure, I can change the subject, but my response to offensive material is so painfully obvious that I get made fun of for it.
I have a sense of humor when it comes to everything, except for that one issue that I hold sacred. It sounds like you're experiencing something similar, in that someone is mocking something you hold sacred, you're reflexively taking offense, and you don't know what to do about it.
Posts: 247 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I think it's a great religion! It appeals to a subset of folks that no other religion can reach, and its an introduction of a sorts. Also, there really are quite a few aspects of God that are infinitely noodly.
