According to MyFoxSanAntonio, an atheist organization on the University of Texas─San Antonio has stumbled upon a novel way to stir up some controversy in the Lone Star State. Namely, they’re engaging in a campaign that exchanges religious texts for pornography. What the what?

Here’s how the exchange, which oddly enough has some people on campus upset, works. The campaign, not-so-provocatively titled “Smut for Smut”, allows students to bring in a sacred religious text─according to UTSA campus paper The Paisano, Torahs and Korans were traded in addition to Bibles─and, in exchange, Atheist Agenda, the campus organization running this whole kit-and-caboodle, would give the 18-and-over crowd a piece of porn.

The argument that Atheist Agenda puts forth is that there are some passages in the Bible that are no worse in terms of their depiction of sexuality and violence that modern-day entertainments which are condemned for being, well, too sexual and violent.  As Atheist Agenda President Carlos Morales explained to the Paisano: “If [Christians are] defining morality by what it says in the bible, then it’s okay to stone your children; it’s okay to tell women they can’t talk outside the church.  I wouldn’t want to live by what they call ‘morality’ in the bible.”

MyFoxSanAntonio has video about the program, which runs through March 3rd, as well as student reaction to the campaign, which can be charitably described as “varied.”

To read more about the UTSA student reaction to the “Smut for Smut” campaign, go here.

Our Take

What I do like about the Atheist Agenda action here is that it stirs up debate by making people of faith examine their texts closely. What bothers me, somewhat, is that I’m not entirely sure about the equivocation between the more supposedly salacious aspects of the Bible and those of pornography. There are a lot of troubling passages in the Bible, and even more seemingly benign passages which have been used to justify horrendous acts in the name of God. There’s a lot of reconciling that can, and must, be done should between the message of love posited by prophets, be they Muhammed, Jesus Christ, or Joseph Smith, and the sheer amount of hate and violence contained in the rest of the religious texts from which many derive their faith.

However, I’m not sure that “Smut for Smut” will inspire such reconciliation. Because pornography is intended to titillate, and titillate alone. Whereas the questionable passages in many religious texts are intended to provide religious and moral guidance. I doubt that you can get any sense of an ethos from Debbie Does Dallas, which is where the analogy falls apart. Sure, maybe religious folk should judge not lest they be judged themselves. But how does pointing out the supposed similarities between Bodacious Tatas and Leviticus do that exactly?