This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Wasn't there another episode of South Park that involved people converting to atheism because preists were molesting little boys? For some reason, they were shoving food up their asses and then puking it to digest it, to parody how people say atheists go about life backwards.
codenamehunterwolf: You're thinking of two different episodes here. The first, Do the Handicappe Go to Hell, revolves around the boys scarred out of their wits about going to hell by the church, and when they think of Timmy, they go to see the priest who is boning some girl in the confessional, thus Cartman steps up to open his own church. It was really just a scam to get money for the new games system he wanted. How to Eat With Your Butt was Exactly What It Said On The Tin, and the tampon one I think was about fads.
Chandagnac: I removed this from the Battlestar Galactica section:
'Father Cavill, a Cylon (masquerading as a priest, no less) who believes "God" (frequently uttered whilst making finger-quotes) to be callous and indifferent to the suffering of His creations.'
I did this because Father Cavill is not an atheist (and I don't think the series identifies him as such, correct me if I'm wrong). Believing that God Is Evil is not the same as atheism. Besides, the Battlestar Galactica entry on this page already has an excellent example of a Hollywood Atheist (Gaius Baltar) and a subversion (Bill Adama), so do we really need another, shakier example?
fleb: The example was just badly written, because Cavill is an atheist of some kind, though like several on the page, not very Hollywood— when he admits who he really is, he describes God as 'the explanation primitives make up for why the sun goes down at night.' He's the Token Atheist of the Cylons.
Scrounge: "Doctor Cameron, blah blah blah, at least nominally an atheist (she thinks God might or might not exist, but either way she doesn't believe He takes an interest in humanity)." Wouldn't that make her more of an agnostic? Not that agnostics exist as far as Hollywood is concerned, but still...
Filby: On Ed Elric (since I don't want to shift the main article into thread mode), it's possible I'm confusing comments made by his English VA for canon. Vic Mignogna is apparently a devout Christian (who doesn't seem to know the difference between atheists and agnostics, but that's beside the point) and insists that Ed becomes a theist by the end of the series, but it's been too long since I've seen the ending for me to recall if that's correct.
I know that Ed's circumstances are different in the manga, though I recall one point where another character interprets him holding his hands together as a form of prayer.
Filby: ...and seriously, not to be a dick, but can we have this discussion on the discussion page and not in the main article? Like I said, I'd rather not initiate Thread Mode on the page itself.
And if someone has a problem with my addition, I'd rather they just be bold
and take it right out than start a thread about it. (Except the part about Mustang, 'cause I know that bit stands.)
LO Rd: So did I get this right - you added the Fullmetal Alchemist example? Wow, I wonder what version you've been watching, considering I've only seen passing remarks towards religion in both the anime and the manga. I'm guessing it's either your very own imaginary Plot Tumor (do we have a word for this?) or indeed the voice actor's remarks.
Though I give that the example made me realise that religion does have a stronger impact on the plot of Fullmetal Alchemist than I previously thought; after all, Scar's motivated as much by vengeance as by his religion, and god is frequently made mention of. I just don't find that Ed or Mustang get nearly enough crap for their lack of faith to merit a mention here.
Filby: No, Vic Mignogna did go on at one point about Ed "believing in something greater than himself" or somesuch, which as an evangelical Christian he interpreted as God, so I didn't just pull it out of thin air myself. Someone asked him if he had moral qualms about playing an agnostic, and he said (I'm paraphrasing), "Naw, someone has to play Judas in the story of Jesus, and besides Ed comes around at the end." (Which kind of insulted me as an atheist, but whatever.) I'm inclined to believe he was seeing things where they weren't, but it shaded my view of the series for a time.
There is one point in the manga, however, where Ling sees Ed transmuting with his hands together and says to himself something along the lines of, "What is he doing with his hands? Ahh, I see, he's praying." It feeds into the whole "atheist coming around to religion" meme IMO, but enough to warrant mention on the page? I dunno.
I do think that Ed merits a mention, though, since he fits the "grumpy godless guy" trope pretty well.
LO Rd: Heh, I wonder if Ed could fit the Flat-Earth Atheist mold, considering he's met some sort of god once but continues to assert his agnosticism.
Black Humor: To be fair to Ed, the guy at the Gate is a real dick, and might not qualify as a God at all. Just because he says he's God doesn't mean he's right.
Sukeban: Anyway, Ed explicitly says that he's an atheist in chapter 1 of the manga, the one about the phony cult leader-like priest in Lior.
Ouroboros That's a simplification. Ed is certainly anti-religion, and makes that explicit when talking to Rose and during his confrontation with Father Cornello, but from the way he acts he comes off as more of a deist then atheist. His views also change, as he makes pacing references to God as a being while investigating the Xerxes ruins.
Filby: I took out the "real-life" examples, because it's too easy to fuel a flame war that way. Besides, if it's real-life, it's not "Hollywood" by definition.
Janitor Just removing some natter.
Jester Removed 'Occaisionally Truth in Television' because my understanding was a trope is only Truthin Television if it's a trend in real life, not just spotted in a couple of isolated incidents. The closest that comes to true is that people do sometimes become atheists after tragic events in their lives, but that's one element of a big trope and it doesn't make the whole trope Truth in Television.
Ouroboros: It is a truth in television if people behave that way or fall into the trope. Just not applicable to all or the majority of atheists. The same that its a truth in television that catholic priests have committed sexual assault. It should be left in there.
((Allandrel)): Removed the following entry:
- In From Dusk Till Dawn, Harvey Keitel plays another preacher who lost his faith when his wife died, although he's one of the nicer people in the film. He regains it while fighting vampires, when faced with the choice of being a faithless preacher, or, and I quote, "one mean mother-fuckin' Servant of God." Also, you can't make holy water without faith.
Neophos: Not related to any examples, but I was just wondering about this part of the article:
- Atheists only seem to have arguments against their culture's predominant religion. There is never any evidence that they've looked into non-mainstream religions for something they can find more plausible.
I don't see why they can't be an atheist just because they haven't tried <whatever brand of religion>. That kinda sounds like something from Jehovas witnesses ("Yeah, you don't believe in God? Well, if you try OUR VERSION OF GOD..."). I see nothing Hollywood about this.
Rissa: I think it's just saying that Real Life atheists frequently have looked into non-mainstream religions, while Hollywood Atheists never do.
Minion Of Cthulhu: "While highly intelligent and a skilled doctor, the title character from House is an utterly cynical, Nietzsche Wannabe atheist, and is responsible for the page quote." What page quote?
Mr Wednesday: Removed the "Real Life: You know someone like this" section, because A: If it's going to be included here, it should be on every Strawman Political example and B: I don't. :P
Mr Wednesday: ...aaand snipped another pair of Real Life "examples":
- Richard Dawkins is the quintessential Hollywood Atheist.
- This Troper's father became an atheist after a case of Dead Little Sister, only replace 'sister' with 'brother'. Now, granted, he's researched everything well enough to back up his belief, but he's still verging on Hollywood Atheist.
If you think Dawkins is a Hollywood Atheist, you either know nothing about him or assume the entry simply means "stereotypical atheist" instead of looking at the seven bullet points. The second entry is definitely a one for Troper Tales, not a main article. People, can we just assume real life examples for this kind of entry are No. Just... No territory?
- Fine, is PZ Meyers a good example? :P
Ouroboros: As opposed to the real life lists on all the 'bad' religious examples? Since when did athiests earn carte blanche while religious folk are freely allowed to be criticized? Sounds like a Double Standard that permeates this site pretty heavily.
Grimace: Considering what we've had so far is Richard Dawkisn (not Hollywood Atheist) and a Troper Tale, Mr Wednesday was hardly chopping out controversal entries. There's also the fact there's not as many Atheists in mainstream media as Christians (ie. evangelical tv shows, talks shows etc) - makes sense the more of a demographic you see, the more likely you'll come across the crazies and hypocrites. If you really want to stop feeling persecuted against and deperately want to slap someone in there, may I suggest Chritopher Hitchens? Or visit The Fundamentalist page? It's got something for everyone.
Zombie Neith: Neither Hitchens nor Dawkins qualify. They're both learned men (Dawkins more so than Hitchens) who have both given perfectly reasonable explanations as to why they don't believe in any manner of deity. They could both certainly be described as 'militant' atheists (Dawkins endorses the term), but their reasons for being so are, I find, quite well-reasoned.
Mr Wednesday: Sloppiness on the "bad religious" entries is not an excuse for spreading it to other pages. If you think there's a problem with those pages, do what I did and bloody well fix it rather than whining about ill-defined, generalised "double standards" on the site.
Metasyntactic D: If it's not impolite of me to do so, I'd just like to mention that after being told the "let's be honest,...cheap stereotype" bit as part of the opening scrawl on this trope, after half an hour's thought I still can't think of anyone I've ever met who was an atheist in quite that way (nor can I recall hearing about anyone like that who wasn't either fictional - as per the trope - or exaggerated/distorted by another person's re-telling). I have, however, met plenty of people who seem to think I really, really need to live my life by a strict and fundamentalist interpretation of a religion (varying from a vocally creationist bus driver who told me that "They" had got to me when he became aware that I wasn't a creationist, to a rather endearingly manic street preacher who can be seen some weekdays outside Southern Cross Station and who once tried to convert me). So I guess it's half right.
Blue_Wolfe: Just a quick suggestion. Some of the examples listed on the "Hollywood Atheist" page should be reconsidered but not necessarily removed because they deal less with characters who explicitly deny the existence of God and more with characters who implicitly suggest that God is apathetic, amoral, malevolent, etc. The belief in a less-than-sympathetic or imperfect god is a still a belief in god.
Speaking of which, this reminds me of Vin Diesel's character from "Pitch Black". In paraphrasing, he mentions that while he does believe in God, he personally hates the son of a bitch. This is likely keeping in tune with the adage that God has a cruel sense of humour.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Characters who believe there is a god but reject him should be filed under Nay-Theist.
Nights1stStar: Where the heck did that article picture come from?! Because if it's a real billboard, then this atheist troper is scared.
Nightsky: Yep, it's real, and so's the sponsoring organization, creationist (expletives deleted) twerps Answers in Genesis. Eye-opening, isn't it?
Caswin: I'm afraid I don't see how. Yes, there are religious nuts demonizing atheists to ridiculous levels who are, in this case, apparently disturbingly well-funded. However, besides the fact that I'm having trouble thinking of any group that hasn't gotten the "ridiculous demonization" treatment, I don't think it's demonstrative of the trope — of all the possible stereotypes, I've never seen a story where "atheist" was equated with "cold-blooded murderer".
Mr Wednesday: I don't know, I think "If God doesn't matter to him, do you?" is a pretty solid example of the kind of bullshit that gets thrown around.
Caswin: Not in any show I've seen, and definitely not manifested as a gun-toting killer. Even if atheism is often handled clumsily in the media (hey, guys, join the club), the picture isn't representative of the trope — in fact, if it is taken as the iconic, "eye-opening" example it is supposed to be, the page risks demonizing religious people as belligerent xenophobes. (If will miss the caption if this sticks, though.)
Malchus: Actually, I thought it captured this variant of the trope pretty well: "Atheists are straight-out evil, having apparently rejected all concept of right and wrong when they rejected religion. Chick Tracts love these, too. Compare and contrast Faith–Heel Turn." However, you're right, that's just one variant of the Hollywood Atheist trope, so I'm not gonna protest the removal.
XiVXaV: Maybe it's just me, but is anyone else irked by the fact that this page has a Troper Tales but its religious counterpart, the Fundamentalist, doesn't? It seems like we're saying it's OK for religious people to have a place to complain about annoying atheists, but it's not OK for atheists to have a place to complain about annoying religious people. In my opinion, they both should have one, or neither should (Not to mention the troper tales for this page is getting pretty uncivil).
Mr Wednesday: It should probably be neither, especially since the media nature of these War On Straw tropes should mean that a Troper Tales page is impossible or at best redundant.
EDIT: Having now seen the Troper Tales for this page, I can safely say NUKE IT NUKE IT NUKE IT. GAWD.
zarpaulus: I've taken the liberty of purging most of the Natter from that page, no one cares if there was some collateral damage do they?
Xi V Xa V: Eh, I'm with Mr Wednesday. The whole thing should just be nuked. It's all just whining and paranoid rants about atheists 'disparaging them for believing there's hope for the world', in all caps no less. I also agree that these War On Straw tropes are about stereotypes, and as such are always going to be Flame Bait, so really shouldn't include Real Life examples or Troper Tales pages.
macroscopic: How is Professor X a straw atheist? I've left it in for the benefit of the doubt, but it either needs to be expanded on or dropped.
