Difference between revisions of "Flying Spaghetti Monster"
(more concise) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The '''Flying Spaghetti Monster''' | + | The '''Flying Spaghetti Monster''' parody began as a critique of the [[Kansas Board of Education]]'s decision to allow the teaching of [[Intelligent Design]] in public schools. Believing that [[Intelligent Design]] was a thinly-veiled attempt to bring religion into the classroom, Henderson constructed "Pastafarianism" as a new theological system and argued that it too should be taught alongside Evolution and [[Intelligent Design]].<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/27/AR2005082700019.html?nav=most_emailed Verbatim: Noodle This, Kansas - Washington Post]</ref> on the notion of "teaching the controversy." |
| − | |||
| − | |||
ID opponents argue that [[Intelligent Design]] claims to explain the origin of life, and contrast this "claim" with Pastafarians' nonsensical explanations of [[Global Warming]], [[gravity]] and [[UFO]]s. | ID opponents argue that [[Intelligent Design]] claims to explain the origin of life, and contrast this "claim" with Pastafarians' nonsensical explanations of [[Global Warming]], [[gravity]] and [[UFO]]s. | ||
Revision as of 14:40, April 20, 2007
The Flying Spaghetti Monster parody began as a critique of the Kansas Board of Education's decision to allow the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools. Believing that Intelligent Design was a thinly-veiled attempt to bring religion into the classroom, Henderson constructed "Pastafarianism" as a new theological system and argued that it too should be taught alongside Evolution and Intelligent Design.[1] on the notion of "teaching the controversy."
ID opponents argue that Intelligent Design claims to explain the origin of life, and contrast this "claim" with Pastafarians' nonsensical explanations of Global Warming, gravity and UFOs.
Self-professed believers have called themselves "Pastafarians" (reference to FSM's "noodly appendages").
FSM is used by atheists, such as Richard Dawkins [1], as a modern version of Russell's teapot.
A book was released in 2006, to explain most of the idea.[2]