Internet Goosing the Antithesis

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

Strip, Bitch! Your'e in "Great Satan" Turf!

Score one for Florida:

DAYTONA BEACH, Florida (AP) -- A Muslim woman who, for religious reasons, wanted to wear a veil in her driver's license photo must follow a Florida law that requires a picture of her full face, a state appeals court ruled.

So far so good, but the article gets worse at the end:

The appeals court found enforcement of the law "did not compel Freeman to engage in conduct that her religion forbids -- her religion does not forbid all photographs."

Excuse me? So what if her religion did forbid all photographs? Would the state then comply with her religious beliefs?

Pastafarianism, the great religion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, insists on its preachers wearing full pirate regalia. That includes a Rapier, Scimitar, or other big sharp metal blade. Since it’s my religion, would the state of Florida let me walk into, say, a government building or courtroom with such a weapon? If my religion forbid me from ever removing my Scimitar from my person, would the Judge rule in my favor?

Freedom of religion does not mean freedom to violate secular law. But then again, secular law is not supposed to "infringe" on religious belief or practices. We obviously got a conflict here. If a secular law is aimed at all citizens and has a secular purpose, like photo identification of a licensed driver, then there should be no exceptions granted, or even considered, for some crazy superstition. The appeals court in this case gave this superstitious woman, and all religious bodies, way too much leeway by even implying that if her religion forbid all photographs, then the state might consider her claim valid.

Now that President Bush supports Pastafarianism, I'm going to be sure to wear my Scimitar/Rapier sword combo package on my Pirate's belt next time I have to make a court appearance for a speeding ticket (which shouldn't be long now given how long it's been since I have been pulled over). And I am going to cite the Florida appeals court, President Bush, and Pastafarianism dogma, when the cops try to stop me at the court's metal detector.


Post a Comment


At 9/07/2005 6:48 PM, Blogger James declaimed...

Katrina + Online Marketing - the Good, Bad and Ugly
The world is still reeling from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. How is Katrina affecting the online marketing world and how is our industry helping OR hurting the issue? I believe thousands of sites are ...
Get James Jordans 51 Lessons To Build Muscle Fast at: calorie day gain mass muscle per

At 9/07/2005 10:07 PM, Blogger Not Reformed declaimed...


Your post was both hilarious and sad at the same time.

Hilarious in the pirate imagery...but sad in realizing it is just as 'fair' for you to want to prance around like a pirate in a courtroom as it is for a muslim person to be given leeway for following a book penned by ignorant simpletons.

At 9/07/2005 10:23 PM, Blogger Bahnsen Burner declaimed...

Aaron: "Pastafarianism, the great religion of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, insists on its preachers wearing full pirate regalia. That includes a Rapier, Scimitar, or other big sharp metal blade."

I would think that the cleaver would be the appropriate symbol for a religion which has the kind of culinary implications that Pastafarianism has.

Hey, I just noticed... doesn't the bald guy in James' pic look like a clean-shaven Paul Manata?

At 9/08/2005 2:29 AM, Blogger Aaron Kinney declaimed...

Thanx for the comments Not Reformed and Bahnsen Burner! :)

Cleaver is good for Pastafarianism like the cross is good for Christianity, but the issue here is costume, not symbolism.

A scimitar is for Pastafarianist pirates like the habit is for Catholic nuns.

Yes not reformed, it is ridiculously sad how the scimitar argument is just as valid as the veil argument.

Goddammit! Cant these people understand that when in Rome, do as the Romans? America is the Great Satan after all. Hey, if youre at the strip club, youre gonna see some nudity! And if you wanna get on the runway (drive a car), then you gotta strip too (show your face on the license picture)!

At 9/08/2005 1:52 PM, Blogger MichaelBains declaimed...

Sorry dudes. As much as I enjoyed the post, and as true as your conclusion that secular law can neither promote nor impractically inhibit religion, a sword is categorically different from a veil. It's a weapon.

A better analogy would be our Pastafarianistic eye patches! Unfortunatel in my photo, I was just having my patch tailored at the local cleaners and wasn't expecting the photographer (for our piratical yearbook of course!) to show that day. Sigh...

I do think the License Bureau legally must photograph us without them as well though. After all, how else could the coppers tell that, no matter what color our visible eye is, our patched one is Meatball Brown. (... with Marianara highlights of course.)

At 9/08/2005 3:56 PM, Blogger Not Reformed declaimed...


I understand your point about a 'sword' vs a 'veil.'

However...your reasonable statement is applying to SECULAR standards rather than religious.

If the magic book says to wear a veil...wear a veil. If the magic book says to carry a sword...carry a sword. I think the point of the post was to point out the absurdity of allowing ANY exceptions to secular law based on religious whims.

Religious people are always appealing to the secular worldview though, so it also points out the hypocrisy of a 'believer' to think a veil is "ok" but a "sword" isn't. Even the big man himself, Jesus Fucking Christ, said he came to bring a sword...

At 9/08/2005 7:40 PM, Blogger breakerslion declaimed...

Anyone who has ever run a pasta machine knows that those noodles need to be cut and dried. Cleavers are good for the meat that goes in the grinder for the meatballs, but for slicing noodles you need a sharp knife.

Secular law states that a suspicious person entering a public building may be detained and, if warranted, cavity searched. A person in a burkha looks pretty suspicious to me; what are they hiding under there? Who knows? Wanna keep the veil? Follow the Matron...

At 9/08/2005 11:16 PM, Blogger Aaron Kinney declaimed...


I see your point but I disagree with your conclusion that my analogy is invalid.

A veil is to an ID photo like a scimitar is to a courthouse. See?

Now if you want to apply Pastafarianism to an ID photo, THEN the eyepatch applies. But of course, my ID photo will involve me wearing TWO eyepatches (what can I say? Im a hardcore pirate) and a big pirate hat with a fluffy feather that hangs over my face.

Its the will of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (pasta be upon him).

I went with the scimitar/courthouse comparison for schock value or an extreme example.


At 9/13/2005 4:10 AM, Blogger DUB declaimed...

I really wish His Holy Noodlyness had a fondness for ski masks, because I could then wear one to my local bank. Along with cutlass and blunderbuss.

Humor aside, this falls into that fragile area of defining worthiness of faith. What are the prerequisites? Antiquity? Number of followers? This has actually been an issue in some Supreme Court rulings.

We can get into the discrepencies within the faith regarding and reasoning behind wearing veils (for instance, what role does modesty play in photo identification?), but that's just picky.

I suppose such strict adherence to one's religious requirements just means a loss of the priviledges associated with them. Such as driving, cashing checks, buying liquor, admittance into nightclubs, etc. I'm not about to agree that the gov't NEEDS photo ID's of all of us, but will submit to benefits of their existence.

BTW, I have a (strict-ass) Muslim friend, who isn't down with the whole photograph thing at all.

Also, I believe there actually are some faiths that utilize ceremonial "weapons." I am not up to date with the legal ramifications of such.



Create a Link

<< Home