What was said is that Christianity is the only religion that offers FORGIVENESS FOR WRONGS. Buddhism does not; it has no concept of sin or justice, and thus considers forgiveness unnecessary. Islam does not; it has very specific punishments for sins and very specific rewards for righteousness, and puts them all in a balance. Ancient Judaism had a concept of forgiveness for accidental or unintentional wrongs through sacrificial offerings and modern Judaism has some concept of atonement and God’s forgiveness, but otherwise forgiveness is not found in most religions. So if Hume had said “Muslim” in that particular context, he would have been wrong.

As far as the network audience being outraged, I cannot speak for the audience. I can say that Christians, and Baptists in particular, led the way for religious tolerance. It was Baptist Thomas Helwys who first argued that the government had no business dictating what religion a man should hold, and he vociferously supported the rights of those who disagreed with his beliefs to do so openly and without persecution even when the stance had him sent to prison. So you can thank the Baptists for giving us the concept of religious tolerance, and note that it is only in countries where Protestant influences have been significant that such tolerance exists.

At the same time, it seems to me that a commentator is by definition giving his opinion. It should be an informed and intelligent opinion, or we would be fools to listen; but that does not inherently exclude him from giving his opinion if it concerns religion. I have an informed and intelligent opinion concerning religion, as I do concerning time travel, role playing games, and several other fields. If a question touches on my time travel theories, I give my opinion, and it is taken as the opinion of someone who has studied the subject in some depth; the same should be true if a question touches on my religious understanding. That one opinion involves facts and theories about metaphysics and physics and the other facts and theories about the supernatural realm and the human predicament does not automatically invalidate the second from being a valid informed opinion, nor disqualify it from the realm of public discourse.

–M. J. Young