Brit Hume: Completely Clueless, as usual.

Originally Posted by sammi jo

On "Fox News Sunday" yesterday, Fox anchor Brit Hume suggested that Tiger Woods should trade his Buddhist faith for Christianity if he wants to make a personal comback. When host Chris Wallace asked the show's roundtable to predict the biggest sports story of 2010, Hume said: ""Tiger Woods will recover as a golfer. Whether he can recover as a person I think is a very open question, and it's a tragic situation for him. I think he's lost his family, it's not clear to me if he'll be able to have a relationship with his children, but the Tiger Woods that emerges once the news value dies out of this scandal -- the extent to which he can recover -- seems to me to depend on his faith. He's said to be a Buddhist; I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, 'Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.'"

Story here.

Tiger Woods strayed from his Buddhist principles, but far less blatantly than, say, Ted Haggard, Jim Bakker and a smorgasbord of Phony Christian evangelicals did from theirs in recent years. Where were the conservatives re. these moral aberrations?? Nowhere. Ignoresville. As silent as a the grave. In the minds of many of these folk, JudeoChristian beliefs are (morally and ethically) superior to Eastern philosophy... without providing any evidence, justification or reasoning... although the religious right has skewered and distorted genuine Christianity during the last few decades for use as a political tool for the promotion of principles that the founder of Christianity would disown in a nanosecond.

Incidentally, rates of divorce, domestic violence, rape, incest and other violent crime is highest in the Bible Belt. Perhaps it would take the strain off law enforcement and security resources if there was a broad campaign to convert those ranks of bigoted bible bashers to Buddhism?

Originally Posted by sammi jo

On "Fox News Sunday" yesterday, Fox anchor Brit Hume suggested that Tiger Woods should trade his Buddhist faith for Christianity if he wants to make a personal comback. When host Chris Wallace asked the show's roundtable to predict the biggest sports story of 2010, Hume said: ""Tiger Woods will recover as a golfer. Whether he can recover as a person I think is a very open question, and it's a tragic situation for him. I think he's lost his family, it's not clear to me if he'll be able to have a relationship with his children, but the Tiger Woods that emerges once the news value dies out of this scandal -- the extent to which he can recover -- seems to me to depend on his faith. He's said to be a Buddhist; I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, 'Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.'"

Story here.

Tiger Woods strayed from his Buddhist principles, but far less blatantly than, say, Ted Haggard, Jim Bakker and a smorgasbord of Phony Christian evangelicals did from theirs in recent years. Where were the conservatives re. these moral aberrations?? Nowhere. Ignoresville. As silent as a the grave. In the minds of many of these folk, JudeoChristian beliefs are (morally and ethically) superior to Eastern philosophy... without providing any evidence, justification or reasoning... although the religious right has skewered and distorted genuine Christianity during the last few decades for use as a political tool for the promotion of principles that the founder of Christianity would disown in a nanosecond.

Incidentally, rates of divorce, domestic violence, rape, incest and other violent crime is highest in the Bible Belt. Perhaps it would take the strain off law enforcement and security resources if there was a broad campaign to convert those ranks of bigoted bible bashers to Buddhism?

Originally Posted by sammi jo

On "Fox News Sunday" yesterday, Fox anchor Brit Hume suggested that Tiger Woods should trade his Buddhist faith for Christianity if he wants to make a personal comback. When host Chris Wallace asked the show's roundtable to predict the biggest sports story of 2010, Hume said: ""Tiger Woods will recover as a golfer. Whether he can recover as a person I think is a very open question, and it's a tragic situation for him. I think he's lost his family, it's not clear to me if he'll be able to have a relationship with his children, but the Tiger Woods that emerges once the news value dies out of this scandal -- the extent to which he can recover -- seems to me to depend on his faith. He's said to be a Buddhist; I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith. So my message to Tiger would be, 'Tiger, turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world.'"

Story here.

Tiger Woods strayed from his Buddhist principles, but far less blatantly than, say, Ted Haggard, Jim Bakker and a smorgasbord of Phony Christian evangelicals did from theirs in recent years. Where were the conservatives re. these moral aberrations?? Nowhere. Ignoresville. As silent as a the grave. In the minds of many of these folk, JudeoChristian beliefs are (morally and ethically) superior to Eastern philosophy... without providing any evidence, justification or reasoning... although the religious right has skewered and distorted genuine Christianity during the last few decades for use as a political tool for the promotion of principles that the founder of Christianity would disown in a nanosecond.

Incidentally, rates of divorce, domestic violence, rape, incest and other violent crime is highest in the Bible Belt. Perhaps it would take the strain off law enforcement and security resources if there was a broad campaign to convert those ranks of bigoted bible bashers to Buddhism?

Originally Posted by NoahJ

I am going to attempt a reasoned response to this, though I doubt it will make any difference.

First of all, Brit Hume is entitled to his opinions about whatever he feels. He was not actually putting down buddhism itself as a religion, but was asserting that forgiveness was easier to obtain under Christianity. I am not sure that his assertion is true as I have not looked into what type of forgiveness and redemption is offered by Buddhism, but I can say that the Christian faith is very free with it's forgiveness. So, what you are getting hyped up over is that he basically said, (paraphrased) "Tiger, if you don't want to be plagued with guilt over what you have done, it is easier to find forgiveness in the Christian faith than Buddhism. That will make it easier to move on in your life."



All of the above can be attributed to the higher level of and easier accessibility to forgiveness. I feel that people abuse it as a get out of jail free card though. What Jesus would say about anything other than what he has been quoted in the Bible is only speculation on anyone's part. But I would agree that many have flaunted the gift of forgiveness and used it as a tool to achieve personal gain.



This is where your argument just goes mean and spiteful.

Once again, he is not saying that Christians are better people, but that forgiveness is easier to be had under Christianity. At least from the quote you have posted.

Now who is going to take my argument out of context and try to show that I am a bigot first?

Originally Posted by O-Mac

Britt Hume is entitled to his opinion. And so are we. With that said, Britt Hume has no business telling Tiger Woods what religion he should be following. WHO is Brit Hume to decide what anyone should believe? Keep your preaching to yourself.

This Brit Hume garbage is why people think Christians are psycho-reTARDS who think they're better than anyone else. Whether or not he was trying to do that doesn't matter because people will believe that anyway.

And because Brit Hume is a staple of the FOX News Network, the most unbiased network on television [insert sarcasm here], he just makes himself look even more like an idiot.

Originally Posted by BR

Noah, Brit Hume was blatantly trying to convert him and taking a shot at a non-believer. To think anything else is delusional.

The path to reason is easier through atheism. You should become an atheist.

See, not so nice when directed at your dumb religion.

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Atheism requires just as much faith as any religion.

Originally Posted by BR

Atheism isn't a religion and it requires absolutely no faith whatsoever. That's a very ignorant statement you made there.

Originally Posted by BR

Noah, Brit Hume was blatantly trying to convert him and taking a shot at a non-believer. To think anything else is delusional.

The path to reason is easier through atheism. You should become an atheist.

See, not so nice when directed at your dumb religion.

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Everything we do requires faith.

Originally Posted by NoahJ

Should that sting or something? Obviously you see what you want to see. As does everyone else. I saw what his statement was int he quote, and I stand by the interpretation I made. You can read into it further as a conversion attempt, however, over the wire, through the media and not face to face with Tiger, it loses a bit don't you think?

Atheism may be easier for you to reason things out. After all, there are no black and white answers. Everything seems like it would be up for grabs. If you don't like what someone tells you, you can choose not to believe that and make up your own right and wrong. Sitting on the fence is quite simple in some respects, and very hard in others. And the pot shots from there are amusing I am sure.

You can even call someone trying to make a reasoned statement delusional rather than simply answering back and questioning the position reasonably and still feel good about yourself.

Originally Posted by BR

Do most evangelicals really respect other religions? I don't believe Brit's statement was anything more than an in-your-face Christian sticking his nose into someone else's business and saying Jesus is the answer to everything. The rest of your response about what it is to be an atheist is just filled with faulty logic. I think half the problem with Christians is the fact many of them truly don't understand the concept of atheism and misrepresent it completely. Just look at Jazzguru's last two posts.

Originally Posted by BR

Do most evangelicals really respect other religions? I don't believe Brit's statement was anything more than an in-your-face Christian sticking his nose into someone else's business and saying Jesus is the answer to everything. The rest of your response about what it is to be an atheist is just filled with faulty logic. I think half the problem with Christians is the fact many of them truly don't understand the concept of atheism and misrepresent it completely. Just look at Jazzguru's last two posts.

Originally Posted by Frank777

I'd jump in with my two cents, but what's really the point?

If an MSM pundit had said that Woods should look to Buddhism for recovery instead of Christianity, we'd have most of the posters in this thread each arguing the exact opposite of what they're arguing now.

Although the OP does reek of overt anti-Christian bigotry [under the cover of defending another religion], it's what we've come to expect in modern times.

Originally Posted by NoahJ

Either that, or there may not have even been a thread at all. \

Originally Posted by sammi jo

What kind of Christianity you talking about here? The real deal, where people live the teachings (a real rarity) ...... or the ranks of phonies who apply the Christian label to themselves for (a) some kind of self-satisfaction or acceptance by peers, (b) as an excuse to misbehave, knowing that at any time in the future they can "ask for forgiveness" and will be "saved", (c) using the Christian brand for spiritual blackmail.. ie "Believe, or it's eternal hell and damnation for you", or (d) as a tool to make money. I do not know the ratio between real Christians and fake ones, but if Christianity is the majority faith in the US, either fakes predominate, or it's not working.

Not anti-Christian at all. Brit Hume, by saying what he did, flouted one of Jesus' fundamental principles: "Judge not, that ye be not judged... " (Matthew 7:1-5) Hume, if he's a genuine Christian would never have said what he did. (He also wouldn't be working for Fox News!). Hence "clueless".

1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Originally Posted by FormerLurker

I have faith that this thread exists.

Originally Posted by sammi jo

... flouted one of Jesus' fundamental principles: "Judge not, that ye be not judged... " (Matthew 7:1-5) Hume, if he's a genuine Christian would never have said what he did.

Originally Posted by FormerLurker

I have faith that this thread exists.

Originally Posted by Frank777

If you look a few sentences down, you will see that Jesus also said 'By their fruits you shall know them' in the very same passage. Does that not involve a personal judgment call?

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Just one of multitudinous inconsistencies.

Originally Posted by jazzguru

Faith motivates us to action.

For example, I have faith that turning the key in the ignition of my car will cause it to start.

Do I have absolute certainty that the car will start every time? No. I do not. That's where faith comes in.

It's not a difficult concept to grasp.

It's not a question of having faith or not having it. Everyone has it.

It's a question of the object(s) on which our faith rests.

Originally Posted by NoahJ

Do most followers of any religions really respect other religions? Probably depends on the person, not the religion, wouldn't you think?

Faulty Logic? Go ahead, I am interested in your response. Atheism is the belief that there is no God. Right? Or do you subscribe to some other definition?

And as far as Jazzguru's last two posts, faith is not only a religious term, it is however used for religious reasons more often than not. Don't be phobic of the word and you can see that Jazzguru is talking about something other than just religious faith.

Originally Posted by BR

That's stretching the term and using it in a completely different fashion than in it's religious sense. What you are describing is confidence based on prior experience. This is another reason why it's so difficult to talk to religious people. Many are unable to distinguish different meanings of words based on context. I'm reminded of all the "evolution is just a theory hurr hurr hurr!" nonsense. Ya, it's a scientific theory. And theory has a completely different meaning in that context.

Originally Posted by Frank777

I'd jump in with my two cents, but what's really the point?

If an MSM pundit had said that Woods should look to Buddhism for recovery instead of Christianity, we'd have most of the posters in this thread each arguing the exact opposite of what they're arguing now.

Although the OP does reek of overt anti-Christian bigotry [under the cover of defending another religion], it's what we've come to expect in modern times.

Originally Posted by NoahJ

Stretching it by actually using a dictionary supportable definition?

Sounds like you are stretching a bit yourself making an argument that every Christian thinks like every other Christian...

Originally Posted by BR

That's stretching the term and using it in a completely different fashion than in it's religious sense. What you are describing is confidence based on prior experience. This is another reason why it's so difficult to talk to religious people. Many are unable to distinguish different meanings of words based on context. I'm reminded of all the "evolution is just a theory hurr hurr hurr!" nonsense. Ya, it's a scientific theory. And theory has a completely different meaning in that context.

Originally Posted by BR

Atheism is the lack of belief. It is not the certainty that there is no god. It is the unwillingness to leave matters of creation to faith. Now, are there Atheists out there who will say "OMG IT'S 100% CERTAIN THERE'S NO GOD!"? Sure. And I'd disagree with them. Of course it's not 100% certain. But I'd also say it's incredibly unlikely and that I'm virtually certain. I'm also virtually certain that an invisible pink unicorn with rabbit's feet doesn't live above my house. I can't prove it doesn't, but I'm not gonna stay up late at night worrying about the slight chance that there is. And since that chance is so minute, for conversation sake, I'm just gonna round down and say it doesn't exist.

So if it makes you feel any better, if I ever say "there is no god", assume there's an asterisk appended to that statement that reiterates the above.

And the reason that I rail against jazzguru's use is that he's trying to create a "gotcha" situation and confuse the two definitions. "SEEE!!!! EVERYONE HAS FAITH!!!! FAITH IN GOD ISN'T SO FARFETCHED!! HAHAHAHA GO BELIEVE IN GOD NOW KTHXBYE" Ya, I'm not going to fall into that dumb trap. And don't say that it isn't a trap. It's the same horeshit that gets bandied about with the word "theory" and why intelligent design ends up being taught in science classes instead of in theology classes where it belongs.

Give an inch, they take a mile.