Invisible Pink Unicorn
| The dreams of man|
|Disturbing your sleep|
May Her Holy Hooves never be shod.
The Invisible Pink Unicorn, or IPU for those too lazy to write out Her full name, is a mock deity created to make some religious inconsistencies more apparent by having a self-contradictory nature.
The earliest known reference was on Usenet newsgroup alt.atheism on July 7, 1990, where Scott Gibson asked, "how about refuting the existence of invisible pink unicorns?" Notwithstanding this, the IPU is believed to be eternal and omnipresent.
The Invisible Pink Unicorn, like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, is designed to show some of religion's hypocrisy or contradictions. The IPU, for example, makes fun of statements such as, "We have faith that God is kind and in our image, and we logically know that He exists because otherwise so many people wouldn't have died for him," with the statement, "Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorn is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that she is pink; we logically know that she is invisible because we can't see her."
The idea of an "invisible pink unicorn" is made all the more ridiculous by the fact that if it cannot be seen, it cannot have a color.
Another thing her followers do is clarify religious texts, by replacing direct references to god with "the Invisible Pink Unicorn".
Apologia and testimonia
Below are statements made to mock irrationalities found in many organized religions.
- "I was driving home with just a half tank of gas, which was not nearly enough for the distance. Because I had no money for gas, I decided to pray to the IPU for help. Her Holiness worked in mysterious ways by creating a strong wind up the central valley, which incidentally brought large amounts of rain. This tail wind improved my gas mileage just enough for me to reach my driveway. The wind apparently caused widespread flooding down that entire valley, but I suspect the people who got flooded were unbelievers living contrary to the laws of the Great Invisible Pink Unicorn." This is an obvious satire of people who thank God for when they survive a natural disaster even though many more died.
- "Yea, and I was given by inspiration that She was next to me, and I could touch Her, being the loyal servant, and I laid my hand upon Her mane, and She was Pink. She was not pink, She was not colourless, but She felt Pink, and I was thus overcome. I awoke later with a hangover, but I knew She was yet Pink, but invisible." The statement is definitely making fun of Christians who believe that they have "met" God with the hangover comment and the idea of the IPU being "Alpha and Omega".
- "For Her Pinkness is such that it transcends pinkness. Yea, it is beyond the ken of man or mind to comprehend, but we shan't falter in this faith; for it is the doubter who shall be skewered upon Her Sacred Horn, like unto a shish kebab." This, of course, refers to the argument that we cannot "comprehend" God's omnipotence/eternity/etc, as well as that questioning faith will lead to Hell. (I'd prefer being a shish kebab over the eternal grill of Hell, though.)
- "How can you doubt the self-evident fact of the Invisible Pink Unicorn? Would not all reality fail if it did not exist? For it says right here in the Book of Invisible and Lovely Equines, Chapter 2, Verse 34, 'For I, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, am the sustainer of reality.'" This is an obvious reference to creationists who use the Bible, etc, as "proof", thus beginning a large circular argument.
- Unicornist A: "I went back to my New Interstellar Version of the Big Golden Book of Invisible Pink Unicornism, and it definitely says 'MEGA-pink'." Unicornist B: "You're using the NIV! Great oyster balls, man, no wonder you came up with this drivel! As any true Unicornist knows, the only Big Golden Book o' Invisible Pink Unicornism is the New Standard Revised Standard Revision, which is a direct translation from the original Yadda Yadda. The only good thing I can say about the NIV is that it's considerably better than the King Ralph version, but that's hardly saying much." This statement is, again, quite obvious in its meaning, satirizing the debate over which translation of the Bible (KJV, NIV, etc) is the 'true' one.