Hey everyone, my group at UTSA is called "Atheist Agenda" and we're running an event called SMUT 4 SMUT. Basically, people can come and turn in their holy scripture for porn.

Here's the TV spot on Fox news about it. I got interviewed for like 45 minutes, which got chopped up into about 45 seconds.


Bibles for porn?

Here's the event page on facebook

Smut for Smut

Here's the two protest groups against it

http://www.facebook.c...

http://www.facebook.c...



The FAQ as to why we're doing it:

Q: What the hell do you think you’re doing?
A: We’ve set up a table where people can stop by and donate their religious reading material and – if they desire, and if they are old enough – receive a number of porn magazines. This can include fundamental texts like the Koran, the Bible, or Dianetics; religious apologia and self-help like Warren’s The Purpose-Driven Life and Lewis’s Mere Christianity; or those unnerving little tracts that Jack Chick makes.

We aren’t the first to come up with this. A group at UT Austin called The Knighthood of Buh did a similar thing called “Porn for Bibles” several years ago. They weren’t atheists, so they didn’t get nearly the publicity (or the backlash) we did when we broadened it to include all religions. It’s a clever reversal of the projects some religious groups have in which they collect porn and distribute bibles, and we owe the idea to the Knights.

Q: Why would you do such a thing?
A: It’s symbolic. Pornography is vilified by the religious community, but in reality the values espoused by religious doctrine are far more reprehensible. So, in effect, it’s trading something appalling for something less appalling. We also like to get people to think, to talk to us, and to debate with us. That only works when they understand just what we’re doing, hence this FAQ.

Q: My religious text is the infallible pinnacle of moral decency. Where could you possibly find fault in it?
A: The Bible and the Koran endorse slavery (Lev. 25:44-46; Col. 3:22; Koran 24:58), misogyny (Lev. 15:19-30,33; 27:3-7; Deut. 22: 23-24; 1 Cor. 14:34-35; 1 Tim 2:9; Koran 2:282; 24:31), violence (just search for any combination of the words “fire,” “blood,” “pain” and “doom”), and genocide (Ex. 12:29-30; Num. 31:1-54; Koran 17:16-17). God kills or commands the death of at least 2,270,365 people in the Bible, many of whom were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. The Koran isn’t much better.

These books do say something about loving one’s neighbor, being kind and charitable, and many other commonplace platitudes. But do we need the bloody mess that comes in between these statements? Haven’t many of us figured these things out for ourselves? Why does the divine consciousness that wrote or inspired these books contradict itself so markedly?

Q: Doesn’t this objectify women?
A: Women choose to participate in pornography of their own accord, and to say it objectifies them against their will presupposes their inability to make decisions – a mindset that kept them from voting and holding careers for a long time. If they want to display themselves in such a manner, and if consumers want to see, then both parties come away happy. The problem arises when someone who uses porn becomes addicted to it or can’t separate fantasy from reality. That’s a failure of the person, not the product.

We also have gay porn. How does that objectify women?

Q: Are you going to burn my book if I give it to you?
A: Destroying knowledge is one of the most disgusting acts imaginable. We keep what you give us as debate tools. Sometimes, in the case of tracts or pamphlets, they’re good for a laugh.

Here's the TV spot on Fox news about it. I got interviewed for like 45 minutes, which got chopped up into about 45 seconds.

Sure, but wasn't the reporter super cute?! =)

Here is the kabb link: http://www.foxsananto...

Carlos, out of curiosity, have you been receiving any harassment about this from your schoolmates?

I admire your guts and reasonable points. I just have 2 questions for you.

I'm sure the debates are the easy part of this demonstration, but how many people have you actually gotten to trade in their scripture for porn?

Are you keeping a count of Bibles vs Korans that you are getting? Please let us know the count because that's just interesting.

Keep up the good work and stay safe.

evidently you're being prayed for by opposition. can u feel the love all those angry people? really tho, very admirable. kudos to you guys.

Jack Riccardi on KTSA is trying to break down "the point of the atheist movement"... and this smut for smut campaign.

Sigh.

It goes like this:

1) The atheists put up a sign that draws eyes, and pisses people off - "Smut for Smut, Bibles for Porn"
2) The Christians get mad
3) They both get on the news
4) The Christians talk about fuzzy emotions, the atheists talk about specific rational points
5) The rational points get compressed into a 10 second soundbite. The emotions make it through crystal clear.
6) Because we're dealing with inciting rage, everything gets more polarized.
7) The Christians stay Christian, but now they distrust atheists even more.
8) The atheists draws a few angry-itchin-for-a-fight atheists into their group. They drive away everybody else.
9) ...
10) Atheists maintain their title as the most distrusted demographic in the nation.

Thanks Atheist Agenda!

An easy fix would be to change the name to "Myth for Myth" and hand out other mythical texts in exchange for the bible. Not as sexy, not as dangerous, less newsworthy. But it makes a stronger point... there are lots of old books. They're not all religions. I could actually see somebody stopping to think about that one.

Once they see bibles stacked on porno, they lose their minds and stop listening. Maybe even make a pamphlet that shows all the other books that include the miracles normally associated with the bible (resurrection, parthenogenesis, weather control etc).

Getting people to think is more difficult and fruitful than making people simply angry. Angry is easy.


"What we think or what we know
or what we believe is, in the
end, of little consequence.
The only consequence is what we do"
- John Ruskin

Matt, your "10 Steps to piss people off and further alienate yourself" was funny dude. I'm not attacking Carlos, I just think what Matt said was funny.

Yeah I attended the function today for several hours and debated a bunch of people in groups and individually. For the most part it was very cordial with a few laughs because I'm funny.

Now I can't speak to the first day which I heard was somewhat contentious but today seemed to go pretty good.

The issue about counter-productivity was addressed as well as it being offensive. For anyone that I spoke with I made it clear that while irony and satire was on full display I originally thought the idea was silly yet it did become an issue of free speech once the AA signs were torn down (twice).

Once that got out of the way lively debates ensued. There were some crazies (like the guy wearing a bandanna around his face pretending his slide phone was a glock) but for the most part a lot of curiosity. Had a good time talking with these guys.

This is important though. A lot of these young kids (i have to remember my age) have never really encountered atheists in person, claim to have an atheist friend like claiming to have black friends (no one ever REALLY does) or their only reference point is what their pastors or Kirk Cameron have told them. Really the talks were generally very pleasant and lively. You could tell the debates they were getting were not what they expected. Points were taken an conceded too and while some still questioned the tactics, they seemed to leave the conversation with at least a better personal understanding of why we disbelieve. Regardless I'm sure I'm being prayed for as we speak.

The one thing that I got to speak about a lot was correcting these guys views about "atheism as another religion" since that was something that seemed to get brought up constantly. Setting the differences between "belief through faith" and "belief through evidence" seemed to get through to some of the believers. Of course they would set up straw-men arguments that would seem to ignore it but as long as they got brought back around to the aforementioned differences in belief through faith or evidence it went generally well.
Good times.