Pastafarian fights to wear colander for DL

[Atomoa]

Hmmmm, sounds like a "dumb but harmless" category to me.

*removed*

[logicalview]

*removed*

*removed*

[my5cents]

It's interesting that the Forum that I created was originally posted in the "Religion and Spirituality" section and included in the title was, "religious headgear". Both very accurate, in that this was a subtle protest by an atheist organization, pointing out the inequities of the application of religion.

That same inequity is obviously alive and well on Castanet.

OR is the "Religion and Spirituality" section reserved for non-atheist discussions ?

[Glacier]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Do you have an English translation?

[my5cents]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Do you have an English translation?

There was one typo, that I've corrected, what don't you understand ?

[Bsuds]

It's interesting that the Forum that I created was originally posted in the "Religion and Spirituality" section and included in the title was, "religious headgear". Both very accurate, in that this was a subtle protest by an atheist organization, pointing out the inequities of the application of religion.

That same inequity is obviously alive and well on Castanet.

OR is the "Religion and Spirituality" section reserved for non-atheist discussions ?

I'm going to assume that the mods decided to delete one thread because there were 2 on the same subject but in different categories. That is their option as to which one is deleted and seeing that when I let them know that there were 2 threads the one in religion had no replies and only the original post and the other had several post in it then it only made sense to delete the one with no reply's.

Does that answer your question 5cents?

[my5cents]

I'm going to assume that the mods decided to delete one thread because there were 2 on the same subject but in different categories. That is their option as to which one is deleted and seeing that when I let them know that there were 2 threads the one in religion had no replies and only the original post and the other had several post in it then it only made sense to delete the one with no reply's.

Does that answer your question 5cents?

My post was primarily an observation, more than a question.

Your observations are likely correct that after I started the Forum "Driver's License Photo Religious Headgear" in Religion and Spirituality at 1050 AM. At 12:47 AM this forum was started by Atomoa, in British Columbia.

Since the route topic/goal of Mr Canuel and the Pastafarian's was to point out religious bios by Canadian government agencies (provincial and federal) in favor of religious groups. The question remains was "Regional Discussion < British Columbia" or "General Discussion < Religion and Spirituality" the correct location for the discussion and should the topic have been "Driver's License Photo Religious Headgear" or " 'Pastafarian' fights to wear colander in Driver's License".

It would seem to me this is a religious debate, not a general discussion pertaining to some guy who is joking around, playing the fool wearing a strainer on his head.

The more shallow interpretation appears to have been the winner.

[Bsuds]

It would seem to me this is a religious debate, not a general discussion pertaining to some guy who is joking around, playing the fool wearing a strainer on his head.

I think playing the fool is closer to the correct interpretation.

[Glacier]

my5cents, I did not know a thread already existed. My apologies. I always perform a quick search before starting a thread, but this one slipped through the cracks. If I had discovered it, I would not have started this one.

My guess is that this thread got more play because fewer people check the "religious" section than the "BC" section. This is clearly not a religious topic in my view because the guy was making a mockery out of religion instead of raising a legitimate religious objection. If people actually believed in the Flying Spaghetti Monster then I would have put this thread in the religious section, but since no one does, I fail to see how this is in any way religious.

It might be true he was trying to criticize religion accommodation, rendering this could be a religious topic, but he did such a poor job expressing his objections, I decided against it.

[Bsuds]

My guess is that this thread got more play because fewer people check the "religious" section than the "BC" section.

I find it easier to click on either "new posts" or "unread posts". Then scroll thru till I see something interesting.

[Glacier]

I find it easier to click on either "new posts" or "unread posts". Then scroll thru till I see something interesting.

That's how I do it too, but some people search through by category.

[Bsuds]

They must be Pastafararians.

[my5cents]

my5cents, I did not know a thread already existed. My apologies. I always perform a quick search before starting a thread, but this one slipped through the cracks. If I had discovered it, I would not have started this one.

My guess is that this thread got more play because fewer people check the "religious" section than the "BC" section. This is clearly not a religious topic in my view because the guy was making a mockery out of religion instead of raising a legitimate religious objection. "British Columbia" or "Religion and Spirituality" I fail to see how this is in any way religious.

It might be true he was trying to criticize religion accommodation, rendering this could be a religious topic, but he did such a poor job expressing his objections, I decided against it.

No problem at all Glacier. I noted that my wording of the topic and likely it's location in Religion wasn't getting much attention, your topic and location did the trick.
I agonized over which location. "British Columbia" or "Religion and Spirituality", "British Columbia" or "Religion and Spirituality", then made my pick, I could have just as easily picked "British Columbia", as that's where anything ICBC goes.

I saw the News piece on the morning CTV, got a good chuckle and knew it was worth a forum topic of some kind. From the initial piece there was no indication that this was an ongoing multinational parody on religion, I originally thought Canuel was pretty sharp for thinking of it. Sadly it wasn't as original as I thought.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on your statement : "This is clearly not a religious topic in my view because the guy was making a mockery out of religion instead of raising a legitimate religious objection. "British Columbia" or "Religion and Spirituality" I fail to see how this is in any way religious."

Just because humor was used to illustrate a point, that IMO, doesn't negate the point that as a society we shouldn't be swayed from our traditional standards just because someone plays the religion card. Be that a police uniform code or the wearing of a hat during the taking of a DL photo. As a result this is a religious discussion, more so than a regulatory discussion.

If others were allowed to wear their hats in DL photo's because they were friends of the office staff, this would be a different story. Certain people are governed by a different set of rules because of religion.

[Symbonite]

W.......

T........

F.........


But Credit him with one thing, it looks like he has a killer NES Collection behind him of which I wouldnt mind..

[my5cents]

UPDATE -

Outrageous !

ICBC has now decided that Obi Canuel of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster can no longer obtain temporary driver's licenses, he must remove his religious head gear (a colander) for his driver's license photo to be taken.

This has got me boiling mad. What has this world come to ?

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-pastafarian-of ... -1.2041499