SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The next story comes from Australia, where a self-described pastafarian went about mocking the rules set up for firearm ID pictures by wearing a colander on his head. Guy Albon convinced the photographer that he was a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster so that he could wear the colander - a symbol of the satirical religious movement whose members refer to themselves as Pastafarians. The 30-year-old said he exploited a law that allows headgear to be worn in photos.
'The law stipulates you can have something on your head,' he said. 'You have to have your entire face uncovered and if the headgear is being worn it has to have some religious significance. I thought 'I've got this one in the bag - it was an absolute scream.'
Officers came to his home, where they seized two handguns and two rifles and ordered him to see a psychiatrist. According to Mr Albon, the psychiatrist immediately declared him as sane and 'laughed it off'.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday June 30 2014, @01:36PM
So where's the line between reasonable and discriminatory for you? If it's a religion only adhered to by, say, 1% of the population, is that not "reasonably well known" enough that you can deprive all the believers of their rights? That's still tens of thousands of people you're saying the government can deprive of their rights and ship to psychiatrists. Maybe .1% -- a few thousand? How small must the minority be in your mind before they lose all rights?
As for the claims that it's a "mock religion" -- well, that's kind of the point, and the point is that *it doesn't matter*. How exactly do you plan to determine the difference? What's your objective way to measure someone's faith? What test do you propose to determine if a god is "real" or not? You can't. It's all made up. If you're going to have legal exemptions for religions, you've just gotta take their word for it regardless. What makes a 2000 year old religion more valid than a 2 year old one?