As a disclaimer, I really feel for Tiger Woods. Many people might think I’m weird for saying so, especially Christians. My answer to them, however, is what do you expect sinners to do? They sin. They don’t have the presence of the Holy Spirit like you do. So lighten up. Secondly, despite the fact that he is a brilliant golfer, a billionaire, and has everything going for him, he also is a man who still puts his pants on one leg at a time. This means he has emotions, a heart, and deals with actions and consequences like everyone else. Granted, he’s made some poor choices over the past few years, which he’s getting a lot of attention for. And you haven’t? Be careful with your stone throwing there, Pharisee. God doesn’t qualify sin into “dirty categories.” It’s all black and punishable by death. I feel for him because he has to be one hurting unit, as is his family; his sponsors are nervous, his fans are unsure, and he’ll be tied up in litigation for the rest of his life. “Well, he deserves it.” And what do you deserve?
This post, however, is not about Tiger Woods per se, but I did feel inclined to make a statement with regard to the recent media coverage of his unfortunate choices. Rather, on a lighter note, I’m here to tell you why I don’t have Google Ads on my site. First off, they never did generate that much money (for me, personally; I know they have for others. Contractually, I’m not allowed to discuss it any further). But more importantly, and like I’m about to show you, they made more than their share of errors, and sometimes quite funny: One day I found I was advertising three different political figures running for office, only all three were from different parties, all indicating they were “Christian” in my content selection. (What can I say? I’m extremely bipartisan, apparently).
This morning I was browsing Twitter, and clicked on this article, saddened by how far this is going for Tiger:
Then, in the body of the article, it mentioned the rumor of a 6-year-old love-child between them:
But right below the final line of, “The six-year-old girl, born between late 2003 and early 2004, appears to be Caucasian. However she was allegedly never given a paternal DNA test,” was followed directly by this advertisement for exploited children:
Umm. I think they found the love-child. And she’s definitely not Caucasian. Thanks to Google Ads for solving this case; DNA test pending. ch: