Your daily source of news & videos on science & religion since 2007
That's just daft. Typical Fox I suppose, though, eh?
You would think with the exposure this guy has had to world events, he'd be a bit more broad minded. I don't know how close he is to Tiger Woods to make the statement that it's, "not clear that he'll have a relationship with his children." From what I know of Tiger I'd quickly say the exact opposite: that it's likely that he will mend his relationship with his children. This guy pissed me off on so many levels.
<p>In our club you can get away with a lot more too.. so join now!
"...once the *news value* dies out of this scandal..."Riiiight. Riiiiiiight. The "scandal" never *had* news value - and then, Hume picks on the Buddhist. This kind of ugly proselytizing is so toothless, it should hurt Fox more than help Christianity.
<span><span>Brit Hume to Tiger Woods: If you only knew the power of the dark side!</span></span>
He's certainly no David Hume..
I agree with Brit compleatly. Im just trying to figure out how Tiger had soo much success WITHOUT Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_humeLook what wikipedia says about Hume."Brit Hume (born June 22, 1943) is an American television journalist, commentator, and Buddhism expert."
How stupid this idea is!!!
I think that if he became an atheist, that I would forgive him.Actually, I forgive him, anyway.See, Brit Tiger Woods has been forgiven.By me.So, there.
I think this Brit guy has lost his marbles.
Don't know why this is an issue at all. First, it's a Sunday morning "commentary" show. He wasn't acting in the role of journalist reporting hard news, he was speaking in the role of opinion and editorial commentary. His "opinion" is exactly what the particular program is about, and in my opinion, he wasn't dogmatic at all. He was <span><span></span></span><span>gracious in offering his perspective. You wouldn't have thought anything of it if he'd offered an athiest's perspective, so why is HIS perspective a problem? Second, he wasn't the host, he was the guest. He didn't drive the program or wasn't responsible for the news, he was a guest who was invited for his opinion and that's exactly what he offered. I find it fascinating that athiests want their voice heard in the public square (and rightly so) and yet are quick to criticize other voices...</span>