Are there observable traits among atheist attitudes to marriage and
family? Does any observable atheist model conform largely to the standard model
of the Judeo/Christian nuclear family?
Generally, it's just a part of the story. I do find it interesting that almost
always (at least in SF, less so in fantasy) that religion is shown as a negative
thing.
I have also found that christians SF & fantasy is unreadable. (dotcom #1469)
It depends if you are talking about religion being mentioned or religion being
true. Generally, either way, I don't care. It's fiction.
I would care if a film that gets the mind racing ends up with godiddit. I wouldn't
have enjoyed Contact if it had a religious ending because that is an easy way to
end the story and would be boring, especially as it is speculating about the future
of scientific research.
I didn't however, mind Alien 3 being oriented around religion, on the contrary, it
makes it a more interesting film.
I found the end of "The Black Hole" (Alan Dean Foster) novel unconvincing. (Iain)
Depend on what side it's on, "well if it made sense there wouldn't have to be
religion about it" (Douglas Adams) is one of the better ones, well just DNA in
general - I also saw a funny reference in "Red Dwarf" where a newsreporter tells
that they've found a missing page from the bible, saying "To my beloved, all
charcters and events in this book are fictional, any resemblence to any real
persons or events are purely coincedential"... Finding such a reference makes me
happy, thought it's an old joke... (Nikitta #1759)
It rather depends on the reference. If it espouses a moral of "just believe
and everything will be dandy", I tend to get annoyed. If it is the intent of the work to endorse belief as something really good, I generally just question the moral. If it takes a neutral view, *shrug*. I do tend to enjoy literature that calls religion on its morals. (wingedbeast)
Isn't that redundant, "mention religion in fiction"? ^_^
It depends on the context. When talking about made up religions, or using existing ones to give the characters direction and motivation, it can be a useful plot device. ("The Armageddon Crazy", "1984", and the various "eternal champion" books of Michael Moorcock are good examples of this.)
It's only the rarer piece of trash (anything by L. Ron Hubbard, or "The Turner Diaries") which look to promote ignorant, violent, racist, and seperationist
views that are a problem. Ideology and politics do not make for inspired reading any more than Mein Kampf does. (Bob Dog)
Doesn't affect me one way or another, really. Why should mentioning one piece of fiction in another piece of fiction upset me? (Erikc #2)
It depends. Unless it is proselytizing, it doesn't bother me. It's funny that this question should come up now. A few weeks ago in another thread, someone mentioned 'A Canticle for Liebowitz', which I had read many years ago. I became interested again, and am now rereading my ancient yellow paged copy. Miller provides some interesting ideas on how religion might have evolved, a subject in which I am very interested. I understand that there is a sequel outnow, which I haven't read yet. As soon as I get through the pile of unread or partially read books on my end table, I'll read that one too. (John Hachmann #1782)
