Tiger’s New Religion

Rates of Self Reported Marital Infidelity by Gender: 2000-2008 GSS

Some Teee Veee Jesus freak supposedly named “Brit Hume” has weighed in on the all-important issue of Tiger Woods’ penis. It’s not like we’re conducting two wars or have 12% unemployment or anything, let’s talk about some athlete’s infidelity on the supposedly “serious” news. Among the many problems with “Brit” is that he seems to have no understanding of the relationship between religion and sexuality. Taking a look at the behavior of the C-Street hypocrites may help–and you have to know, that they’re forgiven because of Jesus H. Christ, which means that they can do it again!!!! And, it’s ok!! For Calvinist types and Moslems, infidelity is the fault of the temptations posed by women (blame it on the women….). In contrast, for Hindus and Buddhists, sex is a frivolous attachment to the material world. It’s something you’re supposed to get over once you grow up and become more enlightened.

And, even in the United States, rates of infidelity play out according to that script. Buddhist men are less likely to stray when compared to Protestants, Catholics or other “christians.” Of course, if we really want to cure Tiger of his straying penis, he needs to get a sex change and convert to Hindu or Islam! No Hindu or Moslem women reported marital infidelity between 2000-2008 in the General Social Surveys.

Update: For anyone who thinks that Hume’s comments are perfectly ok, just insert “Jewish” for “Buddhist” in any of his statements and then think about how you might expect public reaction to fall. Of course, nobody gives a flying fuck about Buddhists, those slant-eyed asian fuckers, eh?

And, for the record, Buddhists are the largest non-Christian group in the US after Jews, and they ain’t far behind (especially in the younger cohorts). About 1% of Americans are Buddhist, more than identify with Islam, Hindu, or Sikh. Given current trends, there should be more Buddhists than Jews in the US in the next 2o years.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Tiger’s New Religion”

  1. Sunny Stufflebeam Says:

    Hume did not make comment saying Christians were more faithful in their marriages than Buddhists (we already are aware that we are sinners) but he made the comment that the Christian faith offers forgiveness and redemption if one approaches God with a repentant heart. Stop with the spin… when one of you guys ‘spin’ – it’s like a peanut gallery out there – every one repeats, repeats, repeats.

  2. sherkat Says:

    Yes, us evil non-Christians (who constitute 1/5th of the American population) are “spinning” some teeevee jerk’s christianist bullshit. But, you’re right that he didn’t directly imply that Christians are more faithful spouses than Buddhists; instead he implied that all non-Christians are unforgiven, and therefore condemned by his evil gods to eternal torture in hell. Wow, that’s much better, eh?

  3. Tengrain Says:

    Sherkat –

    Ha! Maybe Tiger’s peen needs to become Xristian. I hear Xristian peen gets all the hot chicks, like Mary.

    Regards,

    Tengrain

  4. sherkat Says:

    Yeah, and their wives are doing the poolboy, too!

  5. aimai Says:

    Sunny Stufflebeam’s point is well taken. Hume was emphatically not saying that Christianity or Christian faith produces better, more moral, people. Hell, look at Hume himself? He’s twice divorced and bears false witness and, worse, is a lousy journalist every day he appears on TV. If Christianity produced honest, diligent, faithful work in any field Hume would have been out on his hypocritical ass long ago.

    That being said, I’m fascinated by Hume’s implicit argument that one should pick one’s religion not on the basis of its truth value, or its ability to shape one’s life, but rather on its cheap and easy grace quotient. I mean, if he’s advising Tiger to convert *in order* to receive some kind of easy, rote, forgiveness and redemption how is that different from some drug addict urging Tiger to convert to, say, meth addiction because it gives a pleasurable high? Morally, Hume is saying something utterly amoral: choose your religion for its convenient response to your sins. Thus, if I knew I were going to be tempted by cannibalism, or necrophilia, I should choose a religion that forgives those sins. Otherwise–uh—what? No, this is making a kind of sense that is not good.

    Basically, Hume’s perspective is that we choose our religions like we choose our ties or our suits–because they feel comfortable, hide those unsightly bulges, and make us look good. Religion should comfort the comfortable and afflict the afflicted. Sounds like Jesus’s sermon on the mount to me!

    aimai

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: