Brit Hume's Tiger Woods Remarks Shine Light On True intolerance

Washington Post ^ | January 08th 2010 | Michael Gerson

[Steelfish]

Brit Hume's Tiger Woods Remarks Shine Light On True intolerance

By Michael Gerson January 8, 2010

After urging Tiger Woods to accept the "forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith" -- and comparing Buddhism unfavorably to that hope -- journalist Brit Hume insisted he was not proselytizing. In this, he is wrong. His words exemplify proselytization. For this, Hume has been savaged. Post media critic Tom Shales put him in the category of a "sanctimonious busybody" engaged in "telling people what religious beliefs they ought to have." Blogger Andrew Sullivan criticized Hume's "pure sectarianism," which helps abolish "the distinction between secular and religious discourse." MSNBC's David Shuster called Hume's religious advice "truly embarrassing."

The assumption of these criticisms is that proselytization is the antonym of tolerance. Asserting the superiority of one's religious beliefs, in this view, is not merely bad manners; it involves a kind of divisive, offensive judgmentalism. But the American idea of religious liberty does not forbid proselytization; it presupposes it. Free, autonomous individuals not only have the right to hold whatever beliefs they wish, they also have the right to change those beliefs and to persuade others to change as well. Just as there is no political liberty without the right to change one's convictions and publicly argue for them, there is no religious liberty without the possibility of conversion and persuasion.

[A message]

Quite right. Apologies for helping to mess up the discussion on this thread. I read the first couple of paragraphs carelessly and jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Egg on my face too.

[AndyTheBear]

I am convinced that 99.999999% of liberals in this country are unbelievers and will roast in hell (the Lake of Fire) forever after being judged at the Great White Throne Judgement. They will be cast into hell, screaming & cursing, receiving their just rewards throughout eternity.

"But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii. He grabbed him and began to choke him. 'Pay back what you owe me!' he demanded.

Mathew 18:28 (NIV)

[zot]

Thanks for the ping.

Yes, this article is a powerful indictment of the anti-christian mindset, and a powerful defense of religious freedom.

I am surprised that it was published in the Washington Post, but I am no longer surprised that many Freepers posted their replies without reading the article.

[reader25]

I watched this segment on Fox News and thought I heard one man reaching out to another in pain. Is that not duty of a man who serves his god. I did not find Britt's statements appalling at all.

We are a Christian nation and should act like one in helping our fellow man when he stumbles. For those who criticize this action by Britt should look to themselves and ask the following question?

What advice would I give Woods that could potentially have the a positive impact on his life. The talking heads offered no advice to Woods but were more interested in attacking Hume for having the gall to offer Woods a potential solution to a better chance at changing and regaining his family and true happiness.