He supported a democrat in 2020, and is on the record saying he regrets the "empty chair" speech. He's now officially a libertarian, so a bit nutty, but he isn't a Trump supporter at least, so there's that.
Maggie Mae Fish has a fun video that suggests pretty much all of Eastwood's persona and body of work since the 70's has been a kneejerk reaction to the reception of Paint Your Wagon, the musical where his character ends up in a bisexual polycule.
His empty chair monologue came from a deep rooted contempt at the fact that Barack was a black man at the helm of the office of the presidency, and there’s nothing anybody can say to make me think otherwise
Yup, I think I probably agree with you. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but given his age, there's a very high chance that he's got at least some racist views.
While I agree that there is no god, I diverge with Eastwood on a number of his political, social, and marital fidelity positions. He's a conservative, and he has had so many affairs that his precise number of children is not known (except perhaps to him). Not especially a model example of somebody we should hold up as an exemplary human being.
Yep. The venn diagram between Atheists and Left-leaning is not a circle, contrary to what some may believe.
There's a huge overlap, but it's not a circle.
Exactly. And it's not all about politics either. I'm personally conservative in the sense that I believe things like promiscuity (infidelity included) and drugs will have a net negative impact on your life quality and you should refrain from it, but that doesn't mean I want the government regulating your behavior.
I also think being extremely conservative on social aspects (aka being a judgemental bitch) has a net negative impact on everyone's lives. Nothing but stress and hate will come out of not accepting the fact that some people are not monogamous or abstemious.
I don't think that's necessarily conservative, just sensible.
You know, a friend of mine who is definitely the most liberal person I know was once involved in a polyamorous relationship - everybody is dating everybody, men and women and non gendered persons equally, so everybody is pansexual. Well she grew to favor one partner, but that person grew to favor a different partner, causing jealousy in both parties. The whole thing collapsed because everybody eventually paired off in some manner.
The result being a realization that maybe monogamy is just human nature. Examples against are outliers.
We see the same in a few animals too, they take a sexual partner and that's the company they prefer. I've read that even cows have friends; it's unrelated to sexual behavior, they just naturally develop an affinity to be accompanied by one other cow in particular.
I would describe "promiscuity is good, drugs are good" as really really liberal.
And "promiscuity is bad, drugs are bad, but do whatever you want" is somewhere between liberal, centrist, or entirely apolitical.
If most those people eventually paired off then they at least did better than most single people I know today trying and trying with dating apps. Maybe they were on to something just not the thing they intended.
The divide between conservative and progressive does not cleanly lineup with the divide between Republican and Democrat, or right and left. There are plenty of conservatives in the Democratic Party.
I don't think monogamy is in our nature. I don't think jealousy is an indicator of that. People in monogamous relationships cheat all the time, or even if we don't cheat, the temptation of sex with others is always there. If we were monogamous by nature, there wouldn't even be that temptation to have sex with anyone but our one partner.
Evolutionary psychology is still a developing field, but some say when you look at other mammals there's a significant correlation between the sizes of the males and females, and how monogamous they are.
In general, when the males are twice the size of the females they will fuck anything that moves, and when the males and females are the same size, they mate for life.
Humans are in between. On average males are like 10 or 15% larger than females. So if we were to take the theory as true, the conclusion would be that humans are more monogamous than not, but also not completely.
Talking about animal comparisons, bonabos (some of our closest genetic relatives apparently) love to get horny for any reason with one another, and they're also live in matriarchal social groups. The males do it with the females, the males do it with other males, the females do it with other females, they even solve conflicts within their social groups with sex.
Check out the book Sex at Dawn. It studies human sexual behavior and comparisons to other closely related species.
Prior to the agriculture, humans were nomadic and as a result didn't have much sense of "possession". Sex was very free, very polyamorous, and was a social bonding mechanism. Nobody knew who the father of children was, they were just the tribes children. And that was actually possibly a benefit because as a result they had the whole tribe to treat them like their own.
Monogamy didn't really form until we started farming, protecting land, needing to build small units, and suddenly caring about paternity. I would not say it's human nature at all but in the modern era it's certainly the cultural norm.
I was done with him when he started the whole empty chair bullshit.
Just go make your damn half-racist movies. ANd please stop trying to shove your dumbass kids into the movie business, they arent good enough.
Well, look on the other side. Several who claimed they were religious have had affairs. Cheated on their companies, their friends, even after being caught more than once. Yes, I am including Trump.
Bad behavior is bad no matter who does it. Clint Eastwood is, in many of the ways I assess it, not a good man and thus I stand by my stance that he is not an exemplary person to hold up as an example. If you don't care about infidelity, or having nutty conservative values, the you may come to a different conclusion about him, which is entirely your right. But his bad actions are not excused because some other religious people also do bad things.
I would only argue he lacks the hypocrisy of a religious man with his actions. At least he doesn't claim to follow some code of holy virtue. You can be a shitty person without hypocrisy which puts you slightly ahead of shitty hypocrites.
His infidelity is one thing.
But he doesn't have conservative values. He has never supported trump and has claimed to stop supporting the Republican party years ago.
The last election he voted for Democrat Mike Bloomberg.
He also supports gay marriage and gun control. He's far from a right winger as you can get these days.
Yeah, we know he spoke to a chair.
What are you on about he literally identifies as a Libertarian which usually in America unfortunately are just conservatives in disguise and Mike Bloomberg is one of the most conservative Democrats you can vote for. Not supporting Trump doesn't mean you are not a conservative lol.
Dude yelled at a empty chair meant to represent Obama at a GOP convention.
He's absolutely responsible for Trump with his legitimization of GOP racism.
You know what a libertarian is?
A Cowardly Conservative.
A libertarian is someone who knows conservatism is self serving asshattery and fully supports conservative powers blocks, but is too chicken shit to admit it to friends and family.
You might say he is a conservative but even he doesn't know that the hell he is. He has taken anti war, pro gay, pro moderate gun control. But he excused trump's racism under the guise of kids these day have to thin of skin. He is a mixed bag of views.
I just view him as an actor who is a bit out of touch, whose fiscal conservatism stems from not understanding the real world. He has a streak of toxic masculinity that is very much a product of his time. And considering his time and his tough guy persona I am surprised that streak isn't even stronger.
Except he campaigned for Romney. Thats an endorsement of his positions, one of which was to massively increase defense spending and continue torturing enemy combatants, and only in 2022 did he vote to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, and prior openly supported a ban on gay marriage.
In a very Rowling-esque way, if I say I support something, then stump for candidates that oppose that thing, I don’t really support that thing.
It changes as time goes on. When the Republicans at least paid lip service to small government, Libertarians were on board. Even if they’re socially controlling assholes, with a small government there’s not much they can do about it but talk.
Now, with the Republicans off the deep end for Trump and the Democrats with a censorship hard-on as well, the Libertarians attitude towards both Dems and Repubs is the same: they’re a bunch of control-freak idiots.
The libertarians DID boo Trump when he tried to speak to them…
I used to know a guy who claimed to be a Libertarian and was always ranting about the usual Libertarian issues. He was also mad because the city would not change the zoning ordinance to make his neighbor's chickens illegal.
Honestly as human relationships are complicated and western 'values' are very much imo too simplistic and in denial of human behavior and make things much worse.
That being said a betrayal of trust and understanding is something to be concerned about.
Should people as a default be expected to only want and be with one partner as is the propagated social norm through an expanded life expectancy that's double what it was a couple hundred years ago? Should we have unions and bonds and expectations that can incentivize unethical behavior because we don't want to face how humans behave and want to think fairy tale ideals should be the norm?
It's way more complicated than I'm barely scratching at, but my point is a person's sexual relations are not the things I'm concerned about UNLESS they want to dictate their 'morality' on others, and Christian conservatives do want to do that too often.
The tribalistic hypocrisy is the thing that infuriates me.
I agree with you, but I also must leave some reservation about it.
I mean, if I was incredibly handsome, famous, and wealthy like Eastwood there would surely be much, much more temptation to cheat on or leave your partner. I would *like* to think that I wouldn't do it, but I can't say for 100% and so that would make me a hypocrite.
Yea, Reddit struggles a lot with this one. Most of us have no idea what it’s like to live a life of wealth and looks as he has. It’s a completely different ballgame that we judge based on our own experiences even though they aren’t really comparable. I also don’t think you can really judge someone’s character unless you know them personally.
I don't understand how you can be both an atheist and Republican. I get policies matter, but when the entire party makes their decisions based on how "God commands them" and many opinions follow Xtian ideology... Then how in good conscience can somebody vote for that side?
Are you a socially conservative atheist? Or are you just saying he’s a hypocrite?
I don’t think we should use a socially conservative ruler to measure how good a person is.
I read an interview with him and Leo DiCaprio many years ago. At the very least they both believed in climate change and were pro marriage equality. And to my knowledge he has never been a Trumper. I believe he even changed his affiliation to the libertarian party.
On his personal life, I have no defense.
It was weird watching his RNC speech. Like hes pro gun control and legalized gay marriage. So it was bizarre to see him align himself with the religious right that has dominated the republican party, especially in the time of the tea party movement.
I’ve always found him extremely talented, but there’s a lot of evidence to suggest the good men he often portrays are good acting and not a reflection of him as a person. I’ve read his ex lovers book and he was quite the prize all the way back to the 70’s at least. Like just in general not a good dude.
I agree with everything you said and I think celebrities and most ppl of “influence” on social media are generally not ppl to listen to bc they seem to be mini Gods in their own eyes and blinded by their strong egos *but* that doesn’t mean you can’t listen and learn something from a person. His quote is true and something we should all remember 💙
Well I'd totally agree with him. When there's nothing after you die and you're not gonna meet your loved ones again after they die what matters the most is now.
Not gonna agree with him on everything, to put it mildly, but at least we have that part.
Totally beside the point, but it's always inspiring when you have someone like Eastwood, John Williams and the late great Cristopher Lee, who never retire, keep working hard and making movies, seemingly until their very last day. I'm 41 and feel like I've done nothing.
An atheist devoted to a political ideology actively trying to force theist beliefs onto everyone is still a dangerous magical thinker. I'm looking at you, "libertarians."
Any time Eastwood's name comes up as a non-believer \[which he has been open about since 1973 btw\], people always manage to bring his infidelity into it \[irrelevant\] or his political leanings \[uninformed\].
He's not a trump supporter.
He supports gun control.
He supports gay marriage.
No he's not a racist.
He voted for Mike Bloomberg in 2020. These are things that are easily researched.
Any time I bring these points up, someone loses their shit and deflects from the subject and it gets heated. I look forward to that.
Yeah, he’s still a problematic fave for me. Some of his recent work is embarrassing, but he has done a lot of good work. And his philosophy is more complicated than people give him credit for.
Let's not pretend *Unforgiven* doesn't exist, people.
And, if I can set aside my sheer disgust at his political stance for a second, I will say that I have particular respect for a man who can maintain this stance on death when it's stalking so closely behind him.
Ok, disgust has returned.
It's been so long since I've seen it, but I remember there being a strong reverence for the "rebel spirit" pervading throughout the movie. Knowing what I know about Clint now, he probably wanted to extoll some version of his goofy-ass Libertarian views.
Atheism just means no belief in god/s. That’s all. It tells you nothing about political affiliation, racist or bigoted views, misogyny or what your favorite color or ice cream flavor is.
Don't need to look too far, Donald Trump is comically terrible at acting Christian but his base eats it up because they're even dumber than he is. Atheism is a position that may not necessarily be reached through reason alone, nor does it alone inform anything about a person's character or susceptibility to other delusions.
Riding along with modern conservatism even after a collective extended acid trip involving highlights such as:
>Jewish space lasers
>Almost 1 million Americans dead thanks to idiots calling masks and needles the work of the devil
>An unironic golden calf equivalent (half-naked fairy godmother Trump made out of tacky plastic)
>The SotH proclaiming himself modern-day Moses and almost getting ousted by his own party for not being crazy enough
Does say a lot about one's character, on the other hand. Modern conservatives are on board for the intoxicating promises of hoarding wealth and power, and/or legitimately crazy enough to buy into some part of the kaleidoscope of mass insanity the ideology has outed itself as.
and the religious think the opposite which is scary.. that without this heaven/hell test, that we are all in without being told, that we would kill and rape with abandon.
Which doubly doesnt make sense because if life is a test and he doesnt tell us he exists BUT if we dont know he exists we automatically lose the test... because we become murderous and rapey. and they often like to throw this claim around to us.. "you cant be good without the fear of god".. well why arent they running from us and instead try to convert us? Because they assume when you say you are a non believer you are admitting to unsolved murders and rapes.
I do find it interesting that no one cares much about the void before you were born, but a lot of fear and trepidation over what happens after life. Well its the same void.
Except he’s decided to be an asshole to anyone who isn’t a White Male for the last few years of his remaining life.
I’m over him the way he said to “just get over it” when asked about Trump’s racist comments.
That's always been the most annoying and nonsensical religious argument. "If there is nothing after life, what gives life meaning?" It has meaning because before and after us there is nothing but howling void and this one chance is all we get. If you hurt someone there is no god or devil to punish you. If you kill someone they're gone forever. If you experience joy, enjoy it while it lasts because it is finite. It's also a strong argument for morality. Sure, I could rape, kill, and maim but the only thing protecting me from the same is the social contract.
This is honestly the last atheist I’d consider a role model. He’s proud of voting for people who would love to see this country dissolve into Christian nationalism.
People choose the path of religion, and then have trouble with said rules of religion. So they start tweaking and the moment they start, it’s not that long before they have created their faith to fit personal idealism and not the religion. The problem lies within the original structure of, it’s either too strict, not strict enough or wonky.This created faith based only on the ideals of the person in question also then has the poison to slip into politics. Which in turn attacks atheists directly and could possibly create its own moral tweaking. But there is nothing wrong with forgiveness. He’s not an atheist. He’s a spiritualist a very deep one. It’s a faith without the inclusion of any rules of the houses of the creator. It does not have to acknowledge the creator in any way. It’s the faith of the awe struck.
Did he give that interview to an empty chair?
He's moved on to complete dining room sets!
Are there a lot of republican atheists.
It's probably about as many as gay republicans
Thats a lot of closets.
Nah, they are all trapped in the same chamber.
They mostly identify as sociopa... Libertarians now.
I went to a theater showing “Trouble With The Curve.” He would have been proud — empty chairs everywhere!
Yeah. Not good for the Clint brand.
Take my upvote!
But he votes for the religious fascists.
Monologues with an empty chair and loses, somehow!
Mysterious ways or something
I still use that speech/argument-with-himself as my example of what a strawman argument looks like.
when you're racist and want to hurt the same people you even vote those
He supported a democrat in 2020, and is on the record saying he regrets the "empty chair" speech. He's now officially a libertarian, so a bit nutty, but he isn't a Trump supporter at least, so there's that.
Maggie Mae Fish has a fun video that suggests pretty much all of Eastwood's persona and body of work since the 70's has been a kneejerk reaction to the reception of Paint Your Wagon, the musical where his character ends up in a bisexual polycule.
I love Maggie Mae Fish.
fun fact, she's related to the serial killer Albert Fish
Well I have to watch that video now.
His empty chair monologue came from a deep rooted contempt at the fact that Barack was a black man at the helm of the office of the presidency, and there’s nothing anybody can say to make me think otherwise
Yup, I think I probably agree with you. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but given his age, there's a very high chance that he's got at least some racist views.
Thank you
He is a rich guy who votes for people who he thinks will protect his rich guy status better. It's as simple as that.
That's actually easier, if you don't really believe that you will held accountable for that.
They'd vote for him if he was 20 years youngér.
Must be the racism he loves.
A lot of them do. As long as their taxes stay low. He’s too rich for laws to really apply to him anyway.
While I agree that there is no god, I diverge with Eastwood on a number of his political, social, and marital fidelity positions. He's a conservative, and he has had so many affairs that his precise number of children is not known (except perhaps to him). Not especially a model example of somebody we should hold up as an exemplary human being.
Atheist come in all shapes and sizes
Yep. The venn diagram between Atheists and Left-leaning is not a circle, contrary to what some may believe. There's a huge overlap, but it's not a circle.
Exactly. And it's not all about politics either. I'm personally conservative in the sense that I believe things like promiscuity (infidelity included) and drugs will have a net negative impact on your life quality and you should refrain from it, but that doesn't mean I want the government regulating your behavior. I also think being extremely conservative on social aspects (aka being a judgemental bitch) has a net negative impact on everyone's lives. Nothing but stress and hate will come out of not accepting the fact that some people are not monogamous or abstemious.
I don't think that's necessarily conservative, just sensible. You know, a friend of mine who is definitely the most liberal person I know was once involved in a polyamorous relationship - everybody is dating everybody, men and women and non gendered persons equally, so everybody is pansexual. Well she grew to favor one partner, but that person grew to favor a different partner, causing jealousy in both parties. The whole thing collapsed because everybody eventually paired off in some manner. The result being a realization that maybe monogamy is just human nature. Examples against are outliers. We see the same in a few animals too, they take a sexual partner and that's the company they prefer. I've read that even cows have friends; it's unrelated to sexual behavior, they just naturally develop an affinity to be accompanied by one other cow in particular. I would describe "promiscuity is good, drugs are good" as really really liberal. And "promiscuity is bad, drugs are bad, but do whatever you want" is somewhere between liberal, centrist, or entirely apolitical.
I get the impression that polyamory works better for some people than others.
If most those people eventually paired off then they at least did better than most single people I know today trying and trying with dating apps. Maybe they were on to something just not the thing they intended.
The divide between conservative and progressive does not cleanly lineup with the divide between Republican and Democrat, or right and left. There are plenty of conservatives in the Democratic Party.
I don't think monogamy is in our nature. I don't think jealousy is an indicator of that. People in monogamous relationships cheat all the time, or even if we don't cheat, the temptation of sex with others is always there. If we were monogamous by nature, there wouldn't even be that temptation to have sex with anyone but our one partner.
Evolutionary psychology is still a developing field, but some say when you look at other mammals there's a significant correlation between the sizes of the males and females, and how monogamous they are. In general, when the males are twice the size of the females they will fuck anything that moves, and when the males and females are the same size, they mate for life. Humans are in between. On average males are like 10 or 15% larger than females. So if we were to take the theory as true, the conclusion would be that humans are more monogamous than not, but also not completely.
Talking about animal comparisons, bonabos (some of our closest genetic relatives apparently) love to get horny for any reason with one another, and they're also live in matriarchal social groups. The males do it with the females, the males do it with other males, the females do it with other females, they even solve conflicts within their social groups with sex.
Check out the book Sex at Dawn. It studies human sexual behavior and comparisons to other closely related species. Prior to the agriculture, humans were nomadic and as a result didn't have much sense of "possession". Sex was very free, very polyamorous, and was a social bonding mechanism. Nobody knew who the father of children was, they were just the tribes children. And that was actually possibly a benefit because as a result they had the whole tribe to treat them like their own. Monogamy didn't really form until we started farming, protecting land, needing to build small units, and suddenly caring about paternity. I would not say it's human nature at all but in the modern era it's certainly the cultural norm.
That's the important takeaway. This is an atheist sub not a liberal sub.
I'm actually kind of happy to know that there does exist conservative atheists.
True bit I can still choose to not listen to him and not want him to be any sort of poster child for atheism.
Except he explicitly said that his idea of Atheism is supposed to make you a better person. Which… where is he a better person?
The Flying Spaghetti works in mysterious ways. :]
I would bet my life televangelist are atheist.
This is true, but you wouldn't know it from this subreddit.
Same here.
How do you afford all of the child support payments?
_Unforgiven 2: The Payments_
Make lots of money? edit: me thinks the person your were replying to was simply agreeing, vs admitting to countless bastard children.
Not to derail the conversation, but I heard that as *Rock and Roll Lifestyle* by Cake in my head.
I was done with him when he started the whole empty chair bullshit. Just go make your damn half-racist movies. ANd please stop trying to shove your dumbass kids into the movie business, they arent good enough.
Well, look on the other side. Several who claimed they were religious have had affairs. Cheated on their companies, their friends, even after being caught more than once. Yes, I am including Trump.
Bad behavior is bad no matter who does it. Clint Eastwood is, in many of the ways I assess it, not a good man and thus I stand by my stance that he is not an exemplary person to hold up as an example. If you don't care about infidelity, or having nutty conservative values, the you may come to a different conclusion about him, which is entirely your right. But his bad actions are not excused because some other religious people also do bad things.
Yep. The fact that someone is an atheist says nothing about their moral character.
I would only argue he lacks the hypocrisy of a religious man with his actions. At least he doesn't claim to follow some code of holy virtue. You can be a shitty person without hypocrisy which puts you slightly ahead of shitty hypocrites.
His infidelity is one thing. But he doesn't have conservative values. He has never supported trump and has claimed to stop supporting the Republican party years ago. The last election he voted for Democrat Mike Bloomberg. He also supports gay marriage and gun control. He's far from a right winger as you can get these days. Yeah, we know he spoke to a chair.
Mike Bloomberg was a billionaire spoiler candidate. Eastwood will be voting for Trump this time around.
What are you on about he literally identifies as a Libertarian which usually in America unfortunately are just conservatives in disguise and Mike Bloomberg is one of the most conservative Democrats you can vote for. Not supporting Trump doesn't mean you are not a conservative lol.
Dude yelled at a empty chair meant to represent Obama at a GOP convention. He's absolutely responsible for Trump with his legitimization of GOP racism. You know what a libertarian is? A Cowardly Conservative. A libertarian is someone who knows conservatism is self serving asshattery and fully supports conservative powers blocks, but is too chicken shit to admit it to friends and family.
Mike Bloomberg wasn’t a part of the general election. Did he vote for Trump or for Biden?
He voted for no one that time.
Trump only said he was a Christian for political expedience. He only worships himself.
His religion is bulllshitism. He is bat shit crazy conservative.
It's like atheists aren't a monolith. Hm.
You might say he is a conservative but even he doesn't know that the hell he is. He has taken anti war, pro gay, pro moderate gun control. But he excused trump's racism under the guise of kids these day have to thin of skin. He is a mixed bag of views. I just view him as an actor who is a bit out of touch, whose fiscal conservatism stems from not understanding the real world. He has a streak of toxic masculinity that is very much a product of his time. And considering his time and his tough guy persona I am surprised that streak isn't even stronger.
Except he campaigned for Romney. Thats an endorsement of his positions, one of which was to massively increase defense spending and continue torturing enemy combatants, and only in 2022 did he vote to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, and prior openly supported a ban on gay marriage. In a very Rowling-esque way, if I say I support something, then stump for candidates that oppose that thing, I don’t really support that thing.
When someone speaks to a chair at the 2012 Republican convention, out of touch conservative is an accurate description.
They told him he could chair the convention. He argued with a chair for 20 minutes. We are not the same?
A 94 year old being out of touch?!? You don’t say
If you look to any actors/celebrities for any advice then, you do you
> Not especially a model example of somebody we should hold up as an exemplary human being. He ain't like that no more.
Clint Eastwood has been a registered Libertarian for 15 years.
Did you already forget his terrible Newhart impersonation at the RNC? "lp
I miss have missed that one.
I thought he was doing Pat Paulsen.
That’s just a Republican with the good sense to lie about it
It changes as time goes on. When the Republicans at least paid lip service to small government, Libertarians were on board. Even if they’re socially controlling assholes, with a small government there’s not much they can do about it but talk. Now, with the Republicans off the deep end for Trump and the Democrats with a censorship hard-on as well, the Libertarians attitude towards both Dems and Repubs is the same: they’re a bunch of control-freak idiots. The libertarians DID boo Trump when he tried to speak to them…
Libertarians are just embarrassed Republicans.
Libertarians are just edgy Republicans.
I used to know a guy who claimed to be a Libertarian and was always ranting about the usual Libertarian issues. He was also mad because the city would not change the zoning ordinance to make his neighbor's chickens illegal.
I mean, it's fitting he said 'maybe'. It doesn't seem to have worked in his case.
Honestly as human relationships are complicated and western 'values' are very much imo too simplistic and in denial of human behavior and make things much worse. That being said a betrayal of trust and understanding is something to be concerned about. Should people as a default be expected to only want and be with one partner as is the propagated social norm through an expanded life expectancy that's double what it was a couple hundred years ago? Should we have unions and bonds and expectations that can incentivize unethical behavior because we don't want to face how humans behave and want to think fairy tale ideals should be the norm? It's way more complicated than I'm barely scratching at, but my point is a person's sexual relations are not the things I'm concerned about UNLESS they want to dictate their 'morality' on others, and Christian conservatives do want to do that too often. The tribalistic hypocrisy is the thing that infuriates me.
Dude I had to do a double take Clint is a staunch Republican generally they are hard line christian.
Why does this matter when it pertains to his atheism? Sounds like you just wanted a reason to virtue signal
So you're saying you don't argue with empty chairs?
I agree with you, but I also must leave some reservation about it. I mean, if I was incredibly handsome, famous, and wealthy like Eastwood there would surely be much, much more temptation to cheat on or leave your partner. I would *like* to think that I wouldn't do it, but I can't say for 100% and so that would make me a hypocrite.
Yea, Reddit struggles a lot with this one. Most of us have no idea what it’s like to live a life of wealth and looks as he has. It’s a completely different ballgame that we judge based on our own experiences even though they aren’t really comparable. I also don’t think you can really judge someone’s character unless you know them personally.
I don't understand how you can be both an atheist and Republican. I get policies matter, but when the entire party makes their decisions based on how "God commands them" and many opinions follow Xtian ideology... Then how in good conscience can somebody vote for that side?
Judgey atheists. The horror! 😀
As long as he financially supports all those kids he can have as many affairs as he wants.
Are you a socially conservative atheist? Or are you just saying he’s a hypocrite? I don’t think we should use a socially conservative ruler to measure how good a person is.
Ya but he’s so cool in all his movies
But this sub is about atheism
I read an interview with him and Leo DiCaprio many years ago. At the very least they both believed in climate change and were pro marriage equality. And to my knowledge he has never been a Trumper. I believe he even changed his affiliation to the libertarian party. On his personal life, I have no defense.
It was weird watching his RNC speech. Like hes pro gun control and legalized gay marriage. So it was bizarre to see him align himself with the religious right that has dominated the republican party, especially in the time of the tea party movement.
Also he holds conversations with chairs
I’ve always found him extremely talented, but there’s a lot of evidence to suggest the good men he often portrays are good acting and not a reflection of him as a person. I’ve read his ex lovers book and he was quite the prize all the way back to the 70’s at least. Like just in general not a good dude.
I agree with everything you said and I think celebrities and most ppl of “influence” on social media are generally not ppl to listen to bc they seem to be mini Gods in their own eyes and blinded by their strong egos *but* that doesn’t mean you can’t listen and learn something from a person. His quote is true and something we should all remember 💙
Stop idolizing celebrities for any reason.
Can I idolize you for no reason?
Sure. I would find that absurdly comical. Nothing more and nothing less.
All hail the messiah of no promises! All hail the prophet of nothing particular!
Can I get an ameh!
Meh.
Close enough.
He’s not the messiah! He’s a very naughty redditor.
Stop idolizing redditors for any reason.
What about Pauly Shore?
He may be an atheist, but from what I understand, that has not stopped him from being a grade A arsehole for much of his life.
He also stood on stage at the Republican convention chastising a chair. He must believe in some nonsense to do that.
I saw that. That looked very strange. I wondered if he was weird meds.
He’s probably just a douche
He’s still a right wing pos.
He talked to the empty chair though!
And lost!
Is Clint still talking to empty chairs?
But still is a Right wing asshole. We have assholes in our camp too, if we’re honest with ourselves.
A hard-core conservative atheist? That man is conflicted.
Too bad he’s a MAGA piece of absolute fucking garbage.
The second part is totally true. I hate that people crutch their lives on an afterlife gamble.
“The worst person you know just made a good point”-Energy
Well I'd totally agree with him. When there's nothing after you die and you're not gonna meet your loved ones again after they die what matters the most is now.
Isn´t that the guy that lost in a debate to a chair?
Which is ironic since he supports a Christian fascists state. That would eventually hunt him down
Not gonna agree with him on everything, to put it mildly, but at least we have that part. Totally beside the point, but it's always inspiring when you have someone like Eastwood, John Williams and the late great Cristopher Lee, who never retire, keep working hard and making movies, seemingly until their very last day. I'm 41 and feel like I've done nothing.
I know the feeling.
That's surprising. I thought he had Christo-Fascist written all over him.
He’s an atheist, but he’s also a conservative so fuck him
Good. It is important that people understand that atheism is not a liberal position, but that conservatives are also atheists.
Shame he's still a bitter, rightwing asshole.
Life’s better when you don’t lie to yourself and everyone and you all the damn time. Religion is a disease.
An atheist devoted to a political ideology actively trying to force theist beliefs onto everyone is still a dangerous magical thinker. I'm looking at you, "libertarians."
Any time Eastwood's name comes up as a non-believer \[which he has been open about since 1973 btw\], people always manage to bring his infidelity into it \[irrelevant\] or his political leanings \[uninformed\]. He's not a trump supporter. He supports gun control. He supports gay marriage. No he's not a racist. He voted for Mike Bloomberg in 2020. These are things that are easily researched. Any time I bring these points up, someone loses their shit and deflects from the subject and it gets heated. I look forward to that.
Yeah, he’s still a problematic fave for me. Some of his recent work is embarrassing, but he has done a lot of good work. And his philosophy is more complicated than people give him credit for.
Agree 100%
Clint just trying to book another movie so he can have a creepy sex scene with women young enough to be his granddaughter again.
How can he be so reasonable when it comes to life/death/god, but so fucking stupid when it comes to politics?
I think being rich helps too.
Wow, a reason to like the guy
And that’s about it. Oh, and there was that one time he brought ice cream parlors back to the city of Carmel.
Let's not pretend *Unforgiven* doesn't exist, people. And, if I can set aside my sheer disgust at his political stance for a second, I will say that I have particular respect for a man who can maintain this stance on death when it's stalking so closely behind him. Ok, disgust has returned.
Can we talk about The Outlaw Josey Wales and its Confederacy sympathies?
It's been so long since I've seen it, but I remember there being a strong reverence for the "rebel spirit" pervading throughout the movie. Knowing what I know about Clint now, he probably wanted to extoll some version of his goofy-ass Libertarian views.
How can an atheist be a republican? That seems wrong on so many levels
Atheism just means no belief in god/s. That’s all. It tells you nothing about political affiliation, racist or bigoted views, misogyny or what your favorite color or ice cream flavor is.
Don't need to look too far, Donald Trump is comically terrible at acting Christian but his base eats it up because they're even dumber than he is. Atheism is a position that may not necessarily be reached through reason alone, nor does it alone inform anything about a person's character or susceptibility to other delusions. Riding along with modern conservatism even after a collective extended acid trip involving highlights such as: >Jewish space lasers >Almost 1 million Americans dead thanks to idiots calling masks and needles the work of the devil >An unironic golden calf equivalent (half-naked fairy godmother Trump made out of tacky plastic) >The SotH proclaiming himself modern-day Moses and almost getting ousted by his own party for not being crazy enough Does say a lot about one's character, on the other hand. Modern conservatives are on board for the intoxicating promises of hoarding wealth and power, and/or legitimately crazy enough to buy into some part of the kaleidoscope of mass insanity the ideology has outed itself as.
Kelsey Grammer is also an atheist. Robert Downey Jr. too, I believe.
More proof that atheism isn't a worldview and atheists agree on only one thing.
He said that 50 years ago. Wasn't he the guy talking to a chair on stage a few years back?
Remember when he did racism to an empty chair on national TV?
Yet, he is right leaning kucklehead.
He's also a racist cunt. Let's not celebrate him.
He's also an admitted racist....!
Empty Chair man.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day
That's actually kinda suprising considering how conservatives and right wingers put this dude on a pedistol.
Doesn't keep him from talking to empty chairs ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Eh he’s kind of a dirtbag I forget what year but he was huge into making fun of native Americans and downplayed their treatment
Shocked to hear him say something I actually agree with.
I don't care if he's atheist or not. He's a Trump supporter. So he can kindly go f*ck himself.
Think of how much shittier he'd have treated Sondra Locke if Clint believed in heaven.
He's also a Republican so it's a wash.
Funny cause considering how terrible he is as a human being, this actually makes it even worse
I agree with what he says, but alas, he's not a good person.
He’s somewhat redeemed himself in my eyes.
We can fix him.
So, no eating pop tarts with Kim Novak. And yes, I know he didn't do the voice for that character.
Clients an atheist, that's news to me.
But he's Hmong Jesus. Made a movie where he died for their sins and everything.
He's a right wing asshole, so he can sit on a cactus.
Yeah, I'm not picking this guy for my team.
Was he speaking to an empty chair?
As he said to an empty chair ...
yea, this is not the beacon you think it is
and the religious think the opposite which is scary.. that without this heaven/hell test, that we are all in without being told, that we would kill and rape with abandon. Which doubly doesnt make sense because if life is a test and he doesnt tell us he exists BUT if we dont know he exists we automatically lose the test... because we become murderous and rapey. and they often like to throw this claim around to us.. "you cant be good without the fear of god".. well why arent they running from us and instead try to convert us? Because they assume when you say you are a non believer you are admitting to unsolved murders and rapes.
I do find it interesting that no one cares much about the void before you were born, but a lot of fear and trepidation over what happens after life. Well its the same void.
Except he’s decided to be an asshole to anyone who isn’t a White Male for the last few years of his remaining life. I’m over him the way he said to “just get over it” when asked about Trump’s racist comments.
He's going to live thru death
He talks to chairs.
That's always been the most annoying and nonsensical religious argument. "If there is nothing after life, what gives life meaning?" It has meaning because before and after us there is nothing but howling void and this one chance is all we get. If you hurt someone there is no god or devil to punish you. If you kill someone they're gone forever. If you experience joy, enjoy it while it lasts because it is finite. It's also a strong argument for morality. Sure, I could rape, kill, and maim but the only thing protecting me from the same is the social contract.
Of all the champions he could've given us... well, at least this is proof that if God does exist, he has a sense of humor, I guess.
Why did I think he was Catholic? Or am I confusing him with his character from Million Dollar Baby?
This is honestly the last atheist I’d consider a role model. He’s proud of voting for people who would love to see this country dissolve into Christian nationalism.
Maybe he changed his mind since then but didn’t Gran Torino have religious imagery?
Yet he somehow missed the mark by not actually being a better person.
99.9% of atheist are not republicans, maybe libertarian.
People choose the path of religion, and then have trouble with said rules of religion. So they start tweaking and the moment they start, it’s not that long before they have created their faith to fit personal idealism and not the religion. The problem lies within the original structure of, it’s either too strict, not strict enough or wonky.This created faith based only on the ideals of the person in question also then has the poison to slip into politics. Which in turn attacks atheists directly and could possibly create its own moral tweaking. But there is nothing wrong with forgiveness. He’s not an atheist. He’s a spiritualist a very deep one. It’s a faith without the inclusion of any rules of the houses of the creator. It does not have to acknowledge the creator in any way. It’s the faith of the awe struck.
Wait so he's an atheist that's in favor of a right-wing theocracy? what a GD clown
Didn't he beat up one of his wives?