Bibles-for-porn stunt draws crowd at UTSA

Fanny Cradock

Atheist Agenda, an student atheist organisation for the Texas University of San Antonio, has drawn the crowds by offering smut (porn) for smut (religious texts). I have to tip my hat to them for their ability to generate interest. Who know possibly some interesting discussions will happen from it.

Still, on the surface, I can't help but think that what they are offering is a lascivious, shallow and selfish form of self gratification. "There probably is no God. Now have a ****!" At best I think religion can have a very positive influence on the individual. I can't think of many people that would testify that porn makes their life better. But who knows!

On a lighter note, it has been pointed out that somebody should have told these guys that the Kama Sutra is a religious text to some Hindus.

prinz

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Atheist Agenda, an student atheist organisation for the Texas University of San Antonio, has drawn the crowds by offering smut (porn) for smut (religious texts)..

This type of thing has been happening for a while. I've definitely read about it before, it could have been mentioned by Donald Miller in one of his books. Rather sad really.

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

On a lighter note, it has been pointed out that somebody should have told these guys that the Kama Sutra is a religious text to some Hindus.

Wasn't there a similar line of though on the Song of Songs?

strobe

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

At best I think religion can have a very positive influence on the individual. I can't think of many people that would testify that porn makes their life better.

And at worst religion can have.................I can't think of many people that would testify that porn incited hatred, slowed the progress of mankind or was partly responsible for people being murdered.

prinz

strobe wrote: »

And at worst religion can have.................I can't think of many people that would testify that porn incited hatred, stood in the progress of mankind or was partly responsible for people being murdered.

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy. There was also a study done IIRC about the majority of prison inmates in the US having reported earlier than average exposure to porn.

strobe

prinz wrote: »

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy. There was also a study done IIRC about the majority of prison inmates in the US having reported earlier than average exposure to porn.

So porn makes people commit multiple murders and/or become carear criminals? Is that why the rise of the internet (and so the availability of porn) lead to a 120,000 times increase in serial killers, and the need to incarcerate the majority of the population in every first world country? Well you learn something new every day.


Edit: Actually I think I remember reading that study, was that the same one that absolutely proved without a doubt that masturbation makes you gay?

Fanny Cradock

strobe wrote: »

And at worst religion can have.................

Very bad consequences for some people.

The same can be said of any ideology - whether that is politics, nationalism or fanatical support of a football team. We already have a debate going about Christianity and tolerance. Your remarks would be better suited to there.

Fanny Cradock

strobe wrote: »

So porn makes people commit multiple murders and/or become carear criminals? Is that why the rise of the internet (and so the availability of porn) lead to a 120,000 times increase in serial killers, and the need to incarcerate the majority of the population in every first world country? Well you learn something new every day.

You are welcome to post here, but let's try not to play silly hyperbolic word games.

strobe

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Very bad consequences for some people.

The same can be said of any ideology - whether that is politics, nationalism or fanatical support of a football team.

I agree man, wasn't trying to single religion out in particular, just counter point the comparison you made between religion and porn i.e religion very very good, porn very very baaaad.

landsleaving

prinz wrote: »

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy. There was also a study done IIRC about the majority of prison inmates in the US having reported earlier than average exposure to porn.

But in both circumstances the criminal behaviour is more likely an effect of something else. Such as the fact that serial killers often have sexual or interpersonal problems, so of course they have more of an appetite for porn since they can't connect with someone else sexually. And people who have access to porn at a younger age more than likely have less responsible parents, and their upbringing would be the cause of their criminal behaiviour.

The FBi is hardly the least biased source of info either! :pac:

landsleaving

Back on topic, it's a stupid stunt and people who are so against religion, assumedly because of it's more negative consequences as ideology, should really take a look at their own methods and realise they're every bit as idiotic sometimes. Nothing wrong with porn, but there's a lot to be learned about other cultures and people, and therefore tolerance, from religious texts.

Oh and I say this as an atheist myself.

Zombrex

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Still, on the surface, I can't help but think that what they are offering is a lascivious, shallow and selfish form of self gratification. "There probably is no God. Now have a ****!"

By the sounds of it it is more

"Look at all this stuff the Bible tells you, this stuff is as bad as the porn you are told is bad"

Like a lot of these atheist "stunts" I think such arguments strike a cord with a lot of Christians who are teetering on the edges of abandoning religion, not so much for proper Christians

Zombrex

landsleaving wrote: »

there's a lot to be learned about other cultures and people, and therefore tolerance, from religious texts.

And ..?

How does that relate to what they are doing?

strobe

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

You are welcome to post here, but let's try not to play silly hyperbolic word games.

Fair enough, was just trying to come up with a more colourful way of saying that claiming that pornography makes people into violent criminals is silly.

landsleaving

Wicknight wrote: »

And ..?

How does that relate to what they are doing?

Well they could encourage people to read them and learn more about what they're so intent on criticising, might show people that religious texts teach morality and are generally positiive, giving the atheist a stronger platform to discuss and debate the problematic aspects of religion which emerge from misinterpretation of texts.

Woulodn't that be far more useful than giving them away? Plus porn is free if you have the internet anyway, so it's no major loss to not get that. :pac:

Zombrex

landsleaving wrote: »

Well they could encourage people to read them and learn more about what they're so intent on criticising, might show people that religious texts teach morality and are generally positiive

I think the point of the campaign though is that they don't teach morality and aren't generally positive. That is why they are equating them with pornography.

Have you read the Old Testament?

landsleaving

It's full of parables. The general gist being don't do bad things and God won't punish you. Yeah there's a lot of violence and angry deity action, but still a certain morality.

i'm not saying everything in the bible is right, it's not, and yeah taking it very literally is far from a good thing, but that's not my point at all.

Even if it IS negative and dangerous, wouldn't it be better to understand why by reading it? You've read it and have the knowledge to debate which is admirable, so surely you see the value in that at least?

Xluna

prinz wrote: »

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy. There was also a study done IIRC about the majority of prison inmates in the US having reported earlier than average exposure to porn.

I think this could be due to a number of factors. Abnormally high testosterone could be one. It doubt it's a case of porn can turn people into serial killers. Also it would be interesting to find out what type of porn these serial killers watch,my guess it's all that hardcore sadistic stuff rather the harmless sheep shagging porn most of us watch.:pac:

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I can't think of many people that would testify that porn makes their life better. But who knows!

Ahem!Cough,cough.:D

Fanny Cradock

Wicknight wrote: »

By the sounds of it it is more

"Look at all this stuff the Bible tells you, this stuff is as bad as the porn you are told is bad"

Frankly, I prefer my quip :P

A couple of thoughts.

First, while some people might want to lump all religions in together, not all religions are the same, nor do all religious texts say the same thing. While you might mention the Bible as an example, I don't see specific religious texts named in the article.

Second, if the smut of religious texts is so bad, then why replace it with other smut? Why smut for smut? Why not smut for a book on ethics?

Zombrex

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Second, if the smut of religious texts is so bad, then why replace it with other smut?

To highlight the "smut" is actually in these religious text (I thought I read references to the Bible in there some where)

That was my point about your quip

They aren't saying Abandon your religion and you can have all this nice porn :pac:

They are saying look at all the horrible things your religion teaches, how is that any different?

At least that is my take on it. It is a challenge to the idea that religion has the high ground on morality, something we have been debating for years :pac:

prinz

strobe wrote: »

So porn makes people commit multiple murders and/or become carear criminals?

Xluna wrote: »

I think this could be due to a number of factors. Abnormally high testosterone could be one. It doubt it's a case of porn can turn people into serial killers.

You know I would swear people are having a hard time digesting simple sentences.

prinz wrote:

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy.

Xluna wrote: »

Also it would be interesting to find out what type of porn these serial killers watch,my guess it's all that hardcore sadistic stuff rather the harmless sheep shagging porn most of us watch.:pac:

You're probably right. However porn can be addictive, and just like drugs some people may watch 'basic' porn everyday and be quite happy. Other people (a small minority granted) will progress onto harder and harder porn when their addiction takes over. Eventually for some it gets to the point where watching doesn't cut it and acting out happens..

landsleaving wrote: »

But in both circumstances the criminal behaviour is more likely an effect of something else. Such as the fact that serial killers often have sexual or interpersonal problems, so of course they have more of an appetite for porn since they can't connect with someone else sexually. And people who have access to porn at a younger age more than likely have less responsible parents, and their upbringing would be the cause of their criminal behaiviour.

+1, but for such people porn can be destructive. Which goes against this line of thought...

strobe wrote: »

.................I can't think of many people that would testify that porn incited hatred, slowed the progress of mankind or was partly responsible for people being murdered.

Actually I think PDN posted a great link before to an audio file of one man's experiences. I suggest you check it out.


As for the topic, would people/Wicknight still be as happy and understanding if there was no swap of smut, but they were saying instead "Bring us your religious texts and we will burn them for you"?

landsleaving

prinz wrote: »

As for the topic, would people/Wicknight still be as happy and understanding if there was no swap of smut, but they were saying instead "Bring us your religious texts and we will burn them for you"?

+1, exactly what I was thinking, and really, it's not a lot different.

Fanny Cradock

prinz wrote: »

Actually I think PDN posted a great link before to an audio file of one man's experiences. I suggest you check it out.

I believe that was myself. But the site hosting the file is being redesigned and it isn't accessible at the mo.

DeVore

The morality taught is only positive if you dont fall into the groups which it acts against... I doubt many homosexuals find Catholic Morality "positive". But then they are filthy gays and deserve what they get (joking!)

Religion may be positive to a single individual but its effect on society has been pretty poor in almost all cases with everything ranging from intolerance (what happened to Love They Neighbour?) to subserviance to fallible humans as though almost gods (from paedophile cover ups to the infalliability of the pope).

The message isnt a bad one but the effect and the interpretations have not been positive for the world in my opinion.

DeV.

strobe

prinz wrote: »

You know I would swear people are having a hard time digesting simple sentences.






Actually I think PDN posted a great link before to an audio file of one man's experiences. I suggest you check it out.

Listen it says right there in the sentence of mine you quoted, "many people" so enough of the "hard time digesting simple sentences" rubish if you are then going to go on and use "one mans experiences" to try and counter my point.

Anyways this is the last post I'll make in the thread as I can see it descending into ridiculousness like above. I'll just say, the idea of trading porn for bibles was obviously done to garner as much publicity as possible. Simply having a campaign saying "give us your bibles" wouldn't have got media attention, and wouldn't have lead to threads like this and people taking about it, which as they state themselves was their primary objective. To spark debate.

And no I wouldn't approve of burning religious texts, or any books. I personally believe if more people read their religious texts in detail, (let's be honest most people never ever do or will) then there would be far fewer people buying into the stuff. I know that personally, reading the bible (the Old Testament moreso than the new, Genesis, Noahs Ark ect) was a major factor in myself coming to the conclusion that it made very little sense.

Zombrex

prinz wrote: »

As for the topic, would people/Wicknight still be as happy and understanding if there was no swap of smut, but they were saying instead "Bring us your religious texts and we will burn them for you"?

Well no since burning books is some what bad for the environment. :pac:

Bring us your religious texts and we will recycle them for you on the other hand I would be perfectly fine with.

I'm only against burning books when it is an attempt to stop others from accessing them (which is the traditional notion of book burning). That does not seem to be the case here.

I can't see any reason to be against people getting rid of their own books.

Do you believe that a person should not get rid of the Bible once they own it? If so I'm curious is this a Christian thing, a notion that the Bible is special as an object in of itself, sort of like the way Americans believe the American flag should never touch the ground and should be disposed of in a particular fashion?

Or do you simply think people should never get rid of books they own?

prinz

Wicknight wrote: »

Bring us your religious texts and we will recycle them for you on the other hand I would be perfectly fine with.

Ah yes, I am sure you would be this accommodating if a Christian group was offering to shred copies of Dawkins etc.

prinz

strobe wrote: »

Listen it says right there in the sentence of mine you quoted, "many people" so enough of the "hard time digesting simple sentences" rubish if you are then going to go on and use "one mans experiences" to try and counter my point.

You see here is what I said...

prinz wrote: »

Actually the FBI has released information that one of the factors linking many of the serial killers in US history is an above normal appetite for pornogrpahy.

This is what you think I said..

strobe wrote: »

So porn makes people commit multiple murders and/or become carear criminals? Is that why the rise of the internet (and so the availability of porn) lead to a 120,000 times increase in serial killers, and the need to incarcerate the majority of the population in every first world country? Well you learn something new every day..

Now do you see how ridiculous your reply was? Either you cannot understand my sentence or you willfully tried to undermine it in a case of reductio ad absurdum.

Zombrex

prinz wrote: »

Ah yes, I am sure you would be this accommodating if a Christian group was offering to shred copies of Dawkins etc.

Well the guy who runs my local Oxfam is a Christian as far as I know, and I'm pretty sure he would take my copy of On the Origin of the Species if I gave it to him.

Again I'm not really following your point here? Are you saying Bibles should never be destroyed? Or not destroyed by atheists?

Genghiz Cohen

prinz wrote: »

You see here is what I said...



This is what you think I said..



Now do you see how ridiculous your reply was? Either you cannot understand my sentence or you willfully tried to undermine it in a case of reductio ad absurdum.

"One of the factors"
Yes it is just one of many factors, but it is the one you brought up.

On the point of burning Dawkins/Darwin books, wouldn't see it as any worse than burning any text(Pretty poor form). But if you were to burn a Pratchett novel, well, it's throw-down time!

prinz

Wicknight wrote: »

Well the guy who runs my local Oxfam is a Christian as far as I know, and I'm pretty sure he would take my copy of On the Origin of the Species if I gave it to him.

What do you think he would do with it though? Do you think he would take it at value as an interesting book which could raise a few quid for Oxfam by selling it, or do you think he would "recycle it" to prove a point?

Wicknight wrote: »

Again I'm not really following your point here? Are you saying Bibles should never be destroyed? Or not destroyed by atheists?

Is that what the group in question are planning to do? If so neither or the above apply. I don't think anyone should encourage anyone else to destroy literature of any worth tbh. Imagine a stand on O'Connell Street looking for people to books by a certain author/genre to be destroyed.. I think it's a backwards step tbh.

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

"One of the factors"
Yes it is just one of many factors, but it is the one you brought up.

Er, it is directly related to the title/topic and was a reply to a hastily edited second post. So no, I didn't "bring it up", merely pointed out a few realities which were then seized upon and blown out of all proportion as if I had said porn = murderers. I didn't. To suggest otherwise is simply acting the clown.

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

On the point of burning Dawkins/Darwin books, wouldn't see it as any worse than burning any text(Pretty poor form).

So you agree that buring Bibles would be pretty poor form too?


Edit: Pretty funny that alongside the original article should be an advert promoting the reading of books..

Zombrex

prinz wrote: »

What do you think he would do with it though? Do you think he would take it at value as an interesting book which could raise a few quid for Oxfam by selling it, or do you think he would "recycle it" to prove a point?

I don't really care. I don't think a physical copy of On The Origin should be treated with reverence. If he wants to rip out the pages to cover the ground while his dog is being house trained that's up to him (so long as he pays Oxfam of course)

prinz wrote: »

I don't think anyone should encourage anyone else to destroy literature of any worth tbh.

You should have a word with my mother. My father is what Oprah would call a "hoarder", he has books all over the house that he has read once or twice but is holding on to them.

My mother is constantly asking/demanding/begging that he throw out some books, at least throw out a book when he buys a new one.

I don't think that makes my mum a bad person? (what you saying about my mum! :pac:)