We Can Discuss Tiger's Sex Life, But Not His Religion?

Fox News' Brit Hume stirred the pot this weekend, commenting on Tiger Woods' infidelities. Hume said:

Whether he can recover as a person depends 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."

Many commentators were offended. Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution responded:

But seriously, I do not understand and can’t begin to comprehend the arrogance it takes to publicly anoint yourself someone’s spiritual adviser, and to then lecture them about their faith and its alleged inadequacies. This was a prepared, considered remark by Hume, not some off-the-cuff aside.

A person’s faith is a private matter between that person and God, and is not a matter to be judged by some pompous TV anchor.

And then there were those, like Pajamas Media's own Charles Martin, who rejected Hume's remarks on religious grounds. Charlie wrote:

Please mention to Brit that his knowledge of Buddhism leaves enough to be desired that he probably shouldn’t opine thereon.

I’ll grant that Buddhism doesn’t provide a transcendental entity which can forgive sin, but then Buddhism doesn’t actually provide the concept of sin either; we replace it with “things which lead to a peaceful life, causing no avoidable harm to others” and, of course, the opposite.

High on that list is “avoid sexual misconduct” which can be translated to “know when to keep your pants zipped.”

Having no concept of transcendent forgiveness, we replace it with the idea that having harmed someone, you should make amends and reconsider your behavior in the future.

You tell me which is more productive: being Forgiven of Sin, or making amends and remedying your faults?