FSMsoc

[Delts]

So I made a facebook group to see who would be interested in setting up such a society. Join the facebook group since then those not on thesinner can express interest as well

Link: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55778019872

[Jormungand]

I'd join a non-religious society, but a FSMSoc is purely there to take the piss. I don't think that's a positive thing to establish a long-lasting society on. Sorry.

[UanarchyK]

I'd join a non-religious society, but a FSMSoc is purely there to take the piss. I don't think that's a positive thing to establish a long-lasting society on. Sorry.

While I think it's *highly offensive* that Jormungand would say a legitimate religion exists solely "to take the piss," I also would be more interested in a secular society as I'm not a Pastafarian.

[Jormungand]

I'd join a non-religious society, but a FSMSoc is purely there to take the piss. I don't think that's a positive thing to establish a long-lasting society on. Sorry.

While I think it's *highly offensive* that Jormungand would say a legitimate religion exists solely "to take the piss," I also would be more interested in a secular society as I'm not a Pastafarian.

Yes, because FSM has absolutely nothing to do with mocking the controversial decisions of the Kansas State Education Board a few years ago regarding creationism ['intelligent design'] vs. evolution. Nada.

[Haunted]

I'd be more attracted towards a free thinking/rationalist soc rather than an out and out pastafarianism sect.

[Haunted]

Yes, because FSM has absolutely nothing to do with mocking the controversial decisions of the Kansas State Education Board a few years ago regarding creationism ['intelligent design'] vs. evolution. Nada.

This is not a refutation of FSM's legitimacy.

[Jormungand]

Yes, because FSM has absolutely nothing to do with mocking the controversial decisions of the Kansas State Education Board a few years ago regarding creationism ['intelligent design'] vs. evolution. Nada.

This is not a refutation of FSM's legitimacy.

No. But it is reason to be sceptical of its legitimacy, in addition to all the other religions (in the same way that one can be more sceptical of Scientology because of Hubbard's previous career and comments he made.)

Anyway, the point is that a FSMSoc is flippant. Go ahead and makeone, but I wouldn't join it and i doubt it would get 20 members as anything except a joke.

[Haunted]

This is not a refutation of FSM's legitimacy.
No. But it is reason to be sceptical of its legitimacy, in addition to all the other religions (in the same way that one can be more sceptical of Scientology because of Hubbard's previous career and comments he made.)

So what are the criteria for a religion to be 'legitimate'?

Anyway, the point is that a FSMSoc is flippant. Go ahead and makeone, but I wouldn't join it and i doubt it would get 20 members as anything except a joke.

I would not like the idea of being in a purely FSM soc, but the FSM soc at other universities is usually just a cheeky front for a serious humanist/rationist/freethought deal.

[Jormungand]

So what are the criteria for a religion to be 'legitimate'?

Whether they're true or not. Which means no religion is legitimate (in all likelihood). I'm not denying that FSMism would be legitimate in the sense that you are within rights to start a society to go with the CU, Islamic, Pagan, etc, societies. Rather, that it's not the best idea to do so if your interest is in promoting scientific scepticism/atheism/humanism/freethought.

I would not like the idea of being in a purely FSM soc, but the FSM soc at other universities is usually just a cheeky front for a serious humanist/rationist/freethought deal.

Yes, I know it is. But if you're going to make a society with a serious point, the facade should present that idea positively. Atheism, humanism, and scientific scepticism have important things to say about the society and world we live in and making these points through humour is an important medium; but to allow it to dominate is counter-productive. It is like an environmentalist* founding a society called the Teddy Bear Society because they are particularly keen on showing the impact of environmental damage via a stuffed animal medium. It belies the important point(s) being made. Even if it should be the case that light humour to point out an absurdity is enough to demolish a point, when religion and wishful thinking is as entangled with the world and with society as it currently is that is not really an option.

* Assuming environmentalism is correct; if you disagree substitute your own example.

[Haunted]

All well and good, but we are talking about a student society and not something pretentiously important. A society is more than just a name.
Herding cats indeed.

[Jormungand]

All well and good, but we are talking about a student society and not something pretentiously important. A society is more than just a name.
Herding cats indeed.

Agreed, but there's a happy medium between FSMSoc and 'The High and Enlightened Society of Freethinkers' (which I agree would be too pretentious). Something like 'FreeSoc' or 'ScepSoc'?

[Haunted]

Well then, get to it. I'm really not too fussed about what the group is called (within reason) but it seems others are which is probably why the FSM FB group is hardly taking off. Start a group, advertise, people will join, we all rejoice etc.

[Delts]

I'd join a non-religious society, but a FSMSoc is purely there to take the piss. I don't think that's a positive thing to establish a long-lasting society on. Sorry.

I find it highly offensive that you would belittle my religious beliefs to that of a piss take. May his noodly appendages squash you like a pancake and a horde of pirates ransack your dwelling.

[Seriously dude, how can you be serious when the religious types are so pious. Arguing rarely works and at least with laughing at them you're enjoying yourself.]

[Jormungand]

I'd join a non-religious society, but a FSMSoc is purely there to take the piss. I don't think that's a positive thing to establish a long-lasting society on. Sorry.

I find it highly offensive that you would belittle my religious beliefs to that of a piss take. May his noodly appendages squash you like a pancake and a horde of pirates ransack your dwelling.

[Seriously dude, how can you be serious when the religious types are so pious. Arguing rarely works and at least with laughing at them you're enjoying yourself.]

Oh, I didn't mean to create the impression that I'm overly serious about the matter. I like a bit of piss-taking as well (The Jack Chick tract posted on PZ Myers' Pharyngula broke my irony meter... brilliant). Probably doesn't help that I did find the FSM that good to begin with (I've always been an Invisible Pink Unicorn fellow.) As I said just thought there is a happy medium somewhere - too serious and nobody would come, too silly and it might as well be another joke soc (not that there's anything wrong with that, but presumably people who join would want some kind of serious element too like talks or discussions, etc.)

[Jono]

Well, if the intention is to run a serious society (with regards to secularism), that'd be fine. However, I should make it clear that we don't do joke societies... Anymore. Bear in mind, there's nothing to stop you from running flippant, or outlandish events, provided there was at least a serious vein to the societies aims and objectives.