Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Does Pastafarianism deserve the same rights as other religions?
To ban rights for Pastafarians is a violation of human rights and religious equality.
Pastafarianism is a religion.
The ability to practice Pastafarianism is being restricted relative to the ability to practice other religions.
Pastafarianism, as a parody of religion, should be protected as free speech and not as religion. But the result is the same, let them wear the colanders.
Religious equality necessitates a societal acceptance of all religions.
Freedom of religion is an inalienable human right, along with freedom of speech.
The concepts of freedom of religion and religious equality are not indisputably human rights.
Religious equality does not necessitate the inclusion of organizations which do not qualify as religions.
Allowing Pastafarians legal religious status undermines the ultimate goal of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster - which is to encourage the complete separation of church and state.
A truly secular state should not circumvent its own laws on the grounds of any religion, established or otherwise.
The manner in which Pastafarianism may or not be banned, restricted, etc. is miniscule and irrelevant relative to historical examples of the restricted rights of a particular religious following, violations of human rights, and general religious equality.
Should sperm donors have the same legal rights, responsibilities and limitations as other biological fathers?
Should all religions be banned on a global scale?
If We Assume That Free Will Does Not Exist, Is It Better To Act As If It Does?