The Federal judge ruled that The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a "real" religion eligible for protection under the First Amendment. This Gospel, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster faith (FSMism), "is a parody" that was originally created as "a riposte to intelligent design that began with a letter to the Kansas State Board of Education when it was considering intelligent design." The letter argued that "intelligent design does not identify the designer, its 'master intellect' could just as easily be a 'Flying Spaghetti Monster' as any Judeo-Christian deity—and, in fact, that there is as much scientific evidence for a Flying Spaghetti Monster as any other creator."
In ruling against the inmate and the chuch of Pastafarianism, the judge wrote "there must be a line beyond which a practice is not 'religious' simply because a plaintiff labels it as such... A prisoner could just as easily read the works of Vonnegut or Heinlein and claim it as his holy book, and demand accommodation of Bokononism or the Church of All Worlds," (citing Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle and Robert A. Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land). Therefore, because the "FSM Gospel is plainly a work of satire, meant to entertain while making a pointed political statement," the Judge concluded that "FSMism is on the far side of that line" and thus not a "real" religion.