Ways a Religious Character Could be Annoying

An antitheist atheist character and a devout cleric end up butting heads through parts of my story. Initially a lot of the things that the cleric does annoys the atheist character, such as frequently burning incense.

The atheist ends up being kind of rude about it but I'm trying to ensure that they audience notices that he does have a good point about certain things so he doesn't come across as a close minded asshole.

Any suggestions for this? Thank you.

Aggressive proselytizing is usually considered a pretty annoying thing to do.

Being apparently agreeable but condescending is a good way to get on anyone's nerves.

For either party, holding to and acting on stereotypes of the other might work. For example:

The religious character might believe that atheists are all "angry at God" (perhaps even that they all have some single easily-identifiable event that caused them to take on atheism), or dogmatically follow science as a pseudo-religion, or are im-/a- moral.

The atheist might believe that religious people have little-to-no grasp of rational thought or logical reasoning, or are dogmatic, or simply believe what they were brought up to believe with no examination of said beliefs.

Another thing that the religious character might do is refer to atheism as a "religion": while one could very much make an argument for atheism being a belief, the term "religion" denotes rather more than just that, and, to the best of my knowledge, atheism doesn't fall under the term.

But in the context of the setting and the religious character's religion, it wouldn't make sense for them to try to convert people.

Also: Many religious people are unaware that non-mainstream religions even EXIST.

I've had to explain what paganism IS to a lot of people. Like, nearly EVERY aspect of my belief system needs to be explained: That I believe in a lot of gods, that I need to cobble stuff together from Native American practices, my own Asian heritage, and whatever I've gleaned from my history sources, and that I let my meals sit out for a few minutes so the gods/ancestors can have some before I eat.

It's nice informing people, but it's also annoying that so many people's worldviews are so narrow.

edited 5th Oct '14 3:26:53 PM by Sharysa

From what I've seen you're trying to write both sides as having something of a point and the "clash" as fairly balanced. Under this light I'd refrain from portraying him as The Fundamentalist or anything of the sort, because that tends to suck out sympathy from the character.

An easy solution, in my view, would be the religious character going a bit overboard with the praying. Like, before doing anything, even in times where there's no time to waste, he drops all that he's doing to do a long-winded religious ritual of some sort, thus further annoying the atheist character (and the atheist character being justifiably annoyed), but also not demonizing the religious guy (as his rituals would be just reflex).

I think one of the most straightforward ways to make a character annoying in relation to their beliefs is to have them, in one way or another, force it upon others. A religious person who acts superior to or tries to convert nonbelievers is a prick, and so is an atheist who disrespects or mocks believers unprovoked.

(In case it's relevant to anyone, I'm personally a convinced atheist who finds the idea of a self-sustaining material universe more awe-inspiring than any abstract concept of deities, but I nonetheless think a lot of the modern, non-anthropocentric forms of religiosity are intellectually respectable and I believe that religion as a societal phenomenon overall does more good than harm.)

My dad works with a guy who apparently thinks it's okay to treat everybody like shit so long as he makes sure to let God know at confession.

That's funny. I'm somewhat religious, and as of late, I've wondered if it's the exact opposite. Despite religion being a good thing for some people, and doing good, it's caused a lot of problems in the world (though that could be argued to be a fault of people who use it for their own ends), and even the good it causes can be done without it.

But that's not really the issue. I think making the person try to force their beliefs on others is good. Maybe a bit of innocent insensitivity so as to keep them sympathetic as well.

The Futurama episode "Hell is Other Robots" could help.

How about if the cleric responds to situations he can't handle with detachment and platitudes. Not borne of any ill-will, just because he doesn't have the answers and just wants people to have faith. The athiest might take this as an insult to the people who are suffering and as the priest putting the responsibility on God rather than taking action himself.

edited 6th Oct '14 9:26:09 AM by Elfhunter

Go read GK Chesterton's The Ball and the Cross. Right now - it's online in the public domain and it's a philosophical farce about an hardcore antitheist (Turnbull) and resolute Christian (MacIan) who try to fight a duel with each other and end up having to fight off everyone else (because OMG just because you both think the question of the existence of God is such an important question that it's worth fighting to the death over doesn't mean anyone else cares, stop being so barbaric and disruptive!)... and then MacIan falls in love with an existentialist and Turnbull with a Catholic, and the only place they can find to duel each other is an insane asylum. Oh, and Satan appears in dreams to tempt them with a Cool Airship.

It's Chesterton, so obviously his own bias is towards MacIan, but it's nevertheless pretty fair to both of them.

..... That actually does sound pretty fucking awesome.

It is. :D Here's a Gutenberg link.

edited 6th Oct '14 6:26:23 PM by Noaqiyeum

This. I can't stand when I'm debating a theist and they hit me with, "I understand your views, everyone finds God in their own way..."

No I don't.

It also sucks when well-meaning Christians try to force the "the pagan gods are angels serving the Capital-G God" idea on non-Christians. Now, one option of this idea is actually a pretty respectful form of "this is why God is everywhere, because He takes many forms."

The other option is often the far less palatable "the real God is just waiting for you to discover/accept Him and then you won't NEED the other gods/angels anymore."

It's like an adult version of "you'll grow out of your invisible friends, sweetie."

edited 8th Oct '14 11:33:56 AM by Sharysa

Trite stock phrases are always annoying. Especially when you've heard them a hundred times before and they're always delivered like they're some new compelling argument that'll open your eyes for the first time.

The numerous lies repeatedly spouted by believers - "Darwin recanted on his death bed", "our church is the True Faith dating back to the time of Christ and has nothing to do with those Evil Catholics" and so forth - are also a great source of annoyance. Of course, you'd have to find the ones that fit the time, place and religion of your book, but there are plenty to choose from - it's not a new tactic that sprung up in response to Darwin's treatise.

edited 8th Oct '14 11:57:29 AM by Wolf1066

Here's what I'd do. Have the cleric annoy the atheist by NOT being a stereotypical annoying religious person. Have him completely fail to meet the other guy's prejudices, but the atheist sees his every practice done within earshot of him as "Forcing his religion on me". Because one way or the other, one of these two characters is going to come off as an asshole, and unless the cleric is all hellfire and brimstone, convert or suffer, it's likely going to be the atheist.

Is it really fair to straw man the Atheist character?

edited 8th Oct '14 9:20:37 PM by HandsomeRob

Is it fair to strawman the religious character?

Good point. I'd prefer not to straw man either of them, though I suspect some people will automatically side with one group on principle and straw man the other side anyway.

Neither need be strawmen, both could have "good" and "bad" points in each other's eyes and both could have aspects they see as virtuous/right that annoy seven cans of shit out of the other.

The religious person could be kindly and genuinely concerned for the "salvation" of the other's soul - but that still could be highly annoying to some people.

It doesn't make the religious person a "strawman".

Nor does "gets annoyed if people go on incessantly about their religion" make the atheist a "strawman".

In fact, the term "strawman" seems to mean "any portrayal I don't personally like" to many people - regardless how well-rounded, realistic and nuanced the character might be.

You could transcribe a real conversation between a religious person of any faith and an atheist and put it into your story verbatim, and people would still scream that you're creating strawman characters.

So, yes, there will be people who will scream "strawman" about either of those characters, no matter what you do.

The religious character would be considered 'pagan' by our world (in the setting his religion in the dominant one)

• I was thinking maybe, upon realizing the other is an atheist, repeatedly and deliberately tries to include him in religious practices (offerings/etc.) despite the fact he states he isn't interested. The religious character is relatively friendly towards him, but assumes that he'll "find faith eventually." Eventually they both get better and become more accepting of each other.

How's that sound?

What are the core tenets of the faith that would prompt him to do so? Religious people here on Earth (with the exception of the J Ws and others who don't believe in an eternal "soul") generally act the way they do out of the belief that the souls of the unreligious (or "wrongly-religious") are in danger of eternal damnation/torment. Whether they are acting out of genuine concern or a less-laudable "scoring Celestial Brownie Points for saving souls" depends on the person concerned, but the rationale - "our Holy Writ says you're dooooooomed" - is there.

Your religious person must have some rationale - that you make obvious to the readers so that they have no excuse to view the character as a stereotypical strawman - for his attempts to get the unreligious one to "find faith".

Do that, and you should have few problems.