Tolerance and faith sharing in a pluralist society: 
is it possible?

Brit Hume - Tiger Woods - Jesus and the Bouhdda

I awoke today wot some interesting news about Brit Hume, an ex-FOX news anchor sharing publicly some religious advice to Tiger Woods, encouraging to embrace Christianity and to let go of his bouhddist background.  Here's a news clip of the moment:



Can you say such things?  Can you say them publicly?  Is Hume being intolerant, belittling one faith to proselytize with his own?  To what point can we go in terms of talking about faith and positively encouraging it?  What is the line between sharing your faith and hope in a personal context and proselytizing in a superioristic way?  Is it merely the religious (fundamentally the Christian one) perspective that is intolerant? and/or can you argue that a secularist perspective can become fundamentalist, extremist and intolerant as well?  Where do you, where can you draw the lines in a pluralist society that seeks not to control but to value its diversity and the parts that make up the whole?
[Washington Post article by Michael Gerson].


I'm preaching this week on identity, specifically Christian identity as presented and inspired in the story of the baptism of Jesus.  I read a SF Gate article [When scary Jesus makes the news] and had to wonder what identity, specifically Christian identity means in our pluralist, tech-friendly and instantaneously-shared media society means.  When do we lose sight of what the moment was/is actually about in favor of creating a new buzz in the endlessly fickly media cycle?  I'm not sure.  Yet I'm also fairly clear that a news announcer sharing his faith (in view of offering help) and criticizing an opposing one in a newscast is maybe not the most holistic, realistic or appropriate way to go about personal faith sharing.

Did Hume go to far? Not far enough?  What do you think?