Gee whiz.
Leftists in the state-run media are lambasting Brit Hume for promoting Christianity on a Sunday morning talk show.
Yesterday, Hume suggested that Tiger Woods try out Christianity to help him with his infidelity problem.
Somebody from something called "The Washington Monthly" starts the ball rolling:
It’s hard to even know where to start with something like this. How many high-profile Christians have had damaging sex scandals of late? Why is Buddhism deemed inadequate for those with family problems? Why is a senior political analyst for a so-called “news” network proselytizing, on the air, during one of the network’s “news” programs?
Since when is THAT a transgression of some sort?
Hume may be right or wrong about Christianity being a solution for Woods. But repression of Hume's thoughts?
That IS a concern for citizens who have the First Amendment at their backs.
HT: Gateway
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If Hume would have said that Woods should convert to Judaism or (gasp) Islam, rather than Christianity, would you have the same reaction???
Hume, like any talk show, has the right to advocate a specific religion or even atheism for that matter. It's a public forum.
Yes, I would have if the usual suspects got their undies in a twist over the mention of religion.
I say "if" because history has shown that any and every religion is more acceptable than Christianity.
Arguments against Buddhism
Post a Comment