All hail our spaghetti overlord!

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Since we're about Religion Month... Here's what a prank an Austrian guy did the other day. Niko Alm applied for a driving license in Vienna, wearing a plastic colander on his head on the photo. Yep, a strainer for filtering spaghetti! And, surprise-surprise! The application was approved! Because Niko had explained that his strange headgear was a "pastafar", i.e. his religious hat. Here, look for yourselves!

This guy defines himself as an atheist, and follower of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The website of this "movement" says that the only dogma in their doctrine is the rejection of any dogmas.

The Austrian police announced that his photo was approved because it had met the only important requirement: the citizen's face should be perfectly visible on the photo. They also explained that their decision had nothing to do with the guy's religious beliefs.

However, before the issuing of the driving license, Niko had to go through the regular psycho test to prove that he was able to drive a motor vehicle. And even after he passed the test successfully it took about a year for the document to be issued.

The eccentric guy says that since the Austrian authorities allow the issuing of official documents with all sorts of religious hats on the head, he should have the right to demonstrate his faith (or lack of it) as he pleases. I say bravo, Austria! And bravo, Niko. You've set a curious precedent, and touched on a deeper issue about religious tolerance, the freedom of confession and, if you like, on the burqa debate.

Comments

[thies.livejournal.com]

How does making fun of religion in general by wearing a strainer on your head touch on the burqa debate, whatever that debate might exactly be?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

The debate:

- Can a woman wear a burqa on her passport photo? Yes/no.
- If no, can a woman wear a head-cloth on her passport photo? If yes, then why not the burqa?
- If no, can a guy wear a turban on his passport photo? Yes/no.
- If no, can a guy wear a Jew cap (can't remember its name)?
- If no, can they wear a piece of cutlery like this guy?

I think the debate is about defining the borders of acceptable religious symbols one could wear on an official document, and the debate could extend to what clothes are considered "acceptable" to wear in public. What if someone believes in the Sea Mermaid and their religion postulates that they should go around topless? Etc etc. I think it's a worthwhile debate.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

> What if someone believes in the Sea Mermaid and their religion postulates that they should go around topless?

Where can I vote for this?

[jlc20thmaine.livejournal.com]

It's called a skull cap or yarmulke not a Jew cap. Also, catholic priests, including the pop, may wear a zucchetto.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

wasn't zuchetto one of the marx brothers?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Sounds like a mafia boss to me.

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

there is no mafia...

I believe...

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

... you are thinking of Zippo:

Re: I believe...

[debergerac.livejournal.com]

aha, that's him.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Yes, thanks.

[thies.livejournal.com]

questions that seems very detached from the content of your post... a quick google showed only one government official floating ideas about that a year ago and not really much since. Got any further info on that?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

OK, and no.

[thies.livejournal.com]

nice debating, kiddo.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

Yay! You successfully shot down 1% of my point. :p

[thies.livejournal.com]

As I'm obviously feeble minded this morning, what are the other 99% of your argument you wanted to have discussed?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

OK, take this as an informative post and nothing more. You may say something or you may not.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

You came short of giving your opinion on any of the above questions. Instead you're focusing on whether they were part of the post. Well done on facilitating a debate.

[thies.livejournal.com]

I go by: you post a topic to debate, ideally state your opinion and provide some basic information on the topic. not just when pressed what the debate might be, post a list of random yes/no questions. I'm sorry, but the OPs post just looks a lot like "lol look at this funny article I found... oh shit, I need to make this relevant to the community, lets tack on a line about burqas, ok done yay!@"

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

OK, post a better post and we'll discuss on it. Deal? Because all you do is complain. When was the last time you posted something?

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

No, he has a point. He thinks this post sucks - OK it does. Next.

[thies.livejournal.com]

likely around the same time I last bothered to look in here, couple of months ago. If my complaining takes the form as above in me trying to figure out the OPs opinion and actual topic for discussion to engage in what this community is about I take it as a compliment, thanks!

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Those stupid Jews and their stupid caps.

[luzribeiro.livejournal.com]

By the way what do they symbolize?

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

Being superstitious kikes.

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

"- Can a woman wear a burqa on her passport photo? Yes/no.
- If no, can a woman wear a head-cloth on her passport photo? If yes, then why not the burqa?"


Um, obvious answer is obvious. The purpose of the photograph on a document like a passport or drivers license is to identify the person it was issued to. The entire point of the Burqa is to conceal any personally identifying traits.

The Turban, Yarmulke, head scarf, piece of cutlery, etc do not conceal your identity and therefore would not interfere with the purpose of the photograph.