Markup View

Author: Sligh

Jun 12th 2012 at 4:23:17 PM

Well, then if we got a religion that doesn't explicitly says something against killing or stealing (most of the ones we have today do, but the same ones didn't in the past and we must also account for fictional religions and so on...) the trope would not apply?

No, I mantain that my previous wording (VERY EVIL and VERY RELIGIOUS people who are not evil BECAUSE they are religious AND ALSO directly go against their own religion, DESPITE what judgement we make of the religious tenents in and of themselves) as the less biased and UnfortunateImplications free.

Your wording has the aditional problem of not accounting for atheists or detractors of specific religions adding characters that follow some religions simply because they don't follow every little rule (specially since in most real religions this is virtually impossible as there are all sorts and contradctions and so on...).

FALLACY: We could and should very well correct the fallacy on the description, but not all people will read the description, specially if they know what the trope is by the title (which would be a sign that we got a good title anyway), so it is better if the explanation comes along a non-biased title (for example "Pious Villain").