Though there really wasn't anything new offered up by Tiger Woods on Sunday during his dual, brief interviews - and I doubt anyone expected any additional admittance or revelations regarding the tiresome subject of his sordid conduct - one thing that struck me was his returning to a religious theme, that of Buddhism playing a new role in his life. Actually, Woods states that Buddhism had been a part of his life growing up and that his forgoing of meditation and other Buddhist practices was part of the problem that led to his entitled and reckless behavior.

Now, I'm not going to doubt the world's best golfer's claim that he is seeking to follow a more spiritual path via Buddhism. And if it offers him the solace, focus and humility that will rebuild his character then I sincerely hope it works for him. Judging whether the humiliated superstar is sincere in his recommitment to himself and his family is impossible for anyone except for him and his loved ones. It is idle and irrelevant conjecture.

But what I do find to be a persistently irritating and irrational trend in sports - and politics for that matter - is that of the athlete invoking God, in whatever form they deem Him/Her/It to be, whether it is during the afterglow of a great triumph or in a moment of contrition when seeking forgiveness. Rather then seeming like a genuine and deeply soulful evocation of one's truest beliefs it comes across more as a prop or trope. With Woods, and again I'm not doubting his religious beliefs - but at the same time it seemed unnecessary to have invoked religion at all. It's as if acknowledgement of belief in religion serves to mitigate negative consequences.

Religion is obviously an inherently touchy subject and even the most considered, objective and open-minded discussions on the topic can be fraught with difficulty (for disclaimer purposes, though raised Catholic, I am currently not a follower of any religion, as art and nature serve as the altars upon which I worship. And I view atheism to be a religion unto itself as it connotes utter certainty, a trait shared with most organized religions). And though there have been studies and conversations regarding the intersection of sports and God, the media has been largely absent when it comes to following up on the subject outside of a seminar-like setting; more to the point, I wish an interviewer would ask questions whenever the word God is spoken as if He/She/It is indeed a direct acquaintance of said athlete.

I mean how many thousands of times have you heard uttered by a player, "I just want to thank my savoir Jesus Christ for allowing me to win today"? Or, "With God's help we were able to come through", or any other similar statements.

I'd love, just once, for an interviewer upon hearing such words to then quickly follow up and challenge such assertions by saying, "so when did God literally speak to you?" Or how about, "...  but I thought the God you subscribe to is one full of benevolence and is generous of spirit. What about you or your team did God seem to favor over the other players on the field. And if some of your opponents also believe in your same God, did this God have something against them?"

It would be refreshing for an athlete to be honest about how his or her religion serves as a guide, salve or inspiration to them and phrase it in a more realistic fashion. So instead of talking about God, who as far as I know has yet to be heard of in a dimension we humans can verify, they'd mention their priest, rabbi, spiritual guru - in other words a fellow human being, had given them hope or strength. That would be a legitimate and tangible claim.

A truly potent cocktail is when God is mixed with patriotism and grafted over a sporting event. And such has been the case for nearly the last decade at Yankee Stadium. Every seventh inning stretch, fans are told - actually commanded - to stand at attention while a rendition of "God Bless America" is played. Isn't it enough that the national anthem is played before every sporting event, a practice that started en masse during World War II and was actually not intended to be a permanent fixture? Is "God Bless America" really needed to augment our national pride and belief in the heavens?

And there was that famous incident in 2008 when fan Bradford Campeau-Lauriona was forcibly removed from the House that Ruth Built for violating the fascistic Steinbrenner policy of not allowing fans to move around during Kate Smith's signature song. I'm still surprised that frightening incident did not enrage civil libertarians even more than it did.

A central tenet of our great and singular country is the freedom to worship as we please, so long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. Also, part of our shared national heritage is a brilliant combination of the seemingly opposed forces of skepticism and wild romantic idealism. It is perhaps our most enduring example of those said checks and balances that are supposed to serve our government so well. It would be wise if the media took a more skeptical approach when notions of religious devotion are ascribed so easily and arbitrarily to sporting events by athletes.