Beliefnet Rick Warren Interview: On Gay Marriage and Divorce

[silentsteve63]

so its ok man marry man? In mans eyes but In Gods eyes this is foul, sinful and dirty. We will continue till we come to the edge of the cliff, some will jump others will stand strong.

[beesave]

he is kind of smart in some aspects, but marriage isn't a religious issue anymore, it's an institution that protects & unites couples under the law as well. No religion should be in our laws - BOTTOM LINE, it's bull shit. Separation between church and state.

[lunasolgirls]

Lame.

[servant714]

no sexually immoral person will have any part in the kingdom of Heaven. Liars, thieves, coveters, haters, idolaters, will all have their part in the lake of fire. No man will go to the Father but those who by the grace of God are called to salvation through Jesus Christ and Him alone.

[sk8erkid6485]

So he supports it yet doesn't believe in it?

[freddie171]

no sin , no god, wow aren't you lucky.Just keep doing all the vile putrid things you do and now you don't have to worry.

[freddie171]

Sorry Rick. Sin is Sin.

[howardpushpa]

duh. buddhist give no crap about sexuality.

[sfeltmate]

Hmmm. I wonder: what percentage of gay marriages end in divorce?

[tugboat2030]

David, according to the Bible, "a man of God's own heart," was married to multiple women.

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 ... Davis according to the bible was "a man AFTER God's own heart ...." And David was married to multiple women yes but had SERIOUS issues with all of his marriages. One man should have only one woman for marriage. It's hard to deal with and love one woman let alone 3! ;-] ... PEACE

[tugboat2030]

@wisepk007 Perhaps he had serious issues, but God seemed to not have a problem with it until he had the affair, and He still let him write most of the Psalms, which many ministers used to make theological talking points.

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 God did have a problem with it but he doesn't control us like robots or puppets .. we have freewill we can do what we want to do. Yes he wrote most of the Psalms no man is perfect God uses imperfect people to get His point across; everytime David messed up whether it was Bathsheba, Absalom, Tamar or himself he wrote about it. We (ministers) use those Psalms to help others when they make mistakes like David; we all miss the mark at times. ;-]

[tugboat2030]

@wisepk007 So would you let a practicing polygamist be a leader in your church?

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 A practicing polygamist be a leader in my church? No I would not allow that don't know of any Christian churches that believe in polygamy. I would have a problem with those whose "sin" came to light and they are leading; a standard must be upheld. I do believe in repentance and forgiveness for ALL not just leaders. So no practicing whoremongers, drunkards, drug abusers, rapists, murderers, liars, thieves if their sin became public must repent. But we all have sinned &havecome short

[tugboat2030]

@wisepk007 But yet, practicing polygamists wrote Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, God's written Word.

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 One must understand the history & situation that David was in why he had multiple wives. That's why I said he did not profit David anything but heartache;his son raped his daughter:then his beloved son killed his oldest son.His personal life was not to be imitated but his spiritual life was one to be admired ckout Psalm 34 & 46.David's heart was one that LOVED his people and provided for their needs;his flesh was just like everyone's else selfish,greedy,envious etc.We all fall short

[tugboat2030]

@wisepk007 I'm just not understanding why you couldn't appreciate a practicing polygamist's spiritual life but not imitate his personal life. Jesus' line runs through Solomon by way of Bathsheba according to Matthew 1. True there was much killing involved in David's family, but if God was so against David's marraige to Bathsheba, wouldn't He find another son conceived by David's first (and perhaps only legitimate) wife to be the ancestors of Jesus?

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 Our spiritual life should overwhelm our personal life where we can show God's will/anointing on our life so others will change. God will allow many things to happen that is against His Law but His Will always supercedes. Every patriarch/leader in the bible had issues Abraham, Jacob/Israel to Peter & Paul. God wants one man & one woman to exemplify marriage not man+man or woman+woman or man+10 wives. Why did God create Eve and not 4 different women for Adam? It's been real be blessed

[tugboat2030]

@wisepk007 It seems that God has changed His mind as He allowed David to write God's Word but now forbids any practicing polygamist from speaking the Word of God. To treat the creation story in the first two chapters as exclusive is dangerous. Eve does not signal love towards Adam in the first two chapters, and God only ordains Eve's desire for her husband after the fall (Gen. 3:16). However, we don't forbid women to love their husbands, even though it's indicative of their fallen nature.

[wisepk007]

@tugboat2030 God did not change His mind when He allowed Abraham to be the Father of the Faithful when Abram lied about Sarai - God does not like lies. God did not change when He allowed Jacob/Israel to be a chosen vessel after he tricked his brother Esau - God does not like treachery. Dangerous?? It's plain & clear I'm reading from the bible not the Book of Mormon. (Gen. 2:18-20) let's us know that we needed a helpmeet ; not helpmeets plural.

[glenncookiowa1979]

There is no "neutral" ground. You cannot be lukewarm on any issue.

[mcthorogood]

I'm a recovering Christian. The hypocrisy amongst religious zealots no longer astounds me.

[uraine7626]

Chris Warren has no grounds for his beliefs; he's just hate homosexuals plan and simple! He only making false, unlogical reason for his hatred.

[larrygentry]

Gluttony is a sin, Rick Warren. Sexual orientation isn't even on the list.

[LifeSoberBobby]

Wow, an honest TV preacher. Gotta respect that.

[Kidplunk]

So... let people divorce. Let's not be so surprised. People get tired of each other and want to move on. Let's not bring self-righteous religion into it.

[torresut]

This guy, Warren, really knows how to distort history. Marriage has been one man and one woman, my ass.

[who000are000you]

Why marriage, if people don't even love themselves? Isn't it a perfect system to get completely lost, whether it be in an equal sex relationship or not.

This question doesn't touch the basic questions of our lives. Not in the slightest.

[purpletalkingbadge]

personally this issue is sooo overwrought considering its only fairly recently humanity as a whole decided to not like same-sex couples, because we sure didn't find anything wrong with it back in the day.

[quarrelsomeness]

Why are christians deciding over the laws? why dont they let gay ppl get married? hey!!! if it is a sin in your own bubble!! let ppl sin if they fucking want to! u should look at so many things that are legal and christians dont give a rats ass. KILLING IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

[Dustball0003]

Nothing is wrong with Gay marriage. o.o *I'm not gay but this is my opinion*

[singledad1234]

Rick Warren IS NOT A CHRISTIAN

HE WOULDNT KNOW THE TRUTH

IF IT HIT HIM IN THE FACE

READ LUKE CHAPTER SIX

and KNOW THAT THIS ASSHOLE IS A MILLIONAIRE

[1235788888]

dumbass white motherfuckers! hahahaha to hell and Beelzebub with religion!!

[faithdelusion]

If gay couples cause aids then straight couples cause HUSBANDS ABUSING WIVES! Domestic violence would hardly happen in gay marriaqes.

[protochris]

This blog has quite a few heterophobes. Gay Marriage is a misnomer. It's like saying hell freezes over. The two are incompatible. Nobody denies gay people the right to love or practice what they want in their bedroom. They should be denied forcing thier beliefs upon others. This country should be free from all religious coercion, including the religion of homosexuality.

[Arkalanos]

Learn some history. The definition of marriage has changed throughout history throughout every culture. Even in America, a few decades ago, interracial marriage was outlawed in many many states.

Changing the definition of marriage is simple and will not negatively affect a single person in this country.

[protochris]

You're wrong there and lack understanding. The definition of marriage never changed, only certain folks eligible for it were denied access to it. That's why gay people can marry, but not with like kind, otherwise the US supreme court would intervene on these matters. Changing the definition would make marriage useless and give it no purpose but to advance gay issues.

[Arkalanos]

Gay marriage is quite legal in several places on this planet, and a few places in America, and guess what! Regular married couples are still married, happily. Nothing had changed.

Gay marriage does not hurt traditional marriage in any way. It doesn't affect you, at all.

[PutTheBookDown1]

Are you kidding, protochris?? How, exactly, would two men or two women getting married be construed as the forcing of beliefs upon others? The religion of homosexuality? I'd love to hear your explanation of that one. And, unless you're an Atheist, some religion or other has "coerced" you into believing; should they have had that right? Certainly! Should they have the right to legislate or enforce this coercion? Certainly not!

[boomac62]

How do they "force" their belief on us who are straight? I'm still straight and married for 20 plus years so i don't see the threat to my marriage. You say Homosexuality is a 'religion"...how? i know gay christians including two in ministry, I think they are Christians first...their sexuality is one part of who they are, not ALL they are. Peace

1` cor. 10:31

[WallyAnti]

Warren surprises me. He starts out his points with reasonable statements. Like when he said that there should be no distinction placed between your sins and mine. But then he goes 180 and flatly says that he supports Prop 8 thereby placing special emphasis on some sins.

This struggle over the definition of marriage is futile and stupid. It's going to happen. No one is going to refer to someone as partners. They are naturally going to say they are married when represented as such.

[oFamous1]

indegayforum(dot)org / news / show / 26996(dot)html

"somewhere between 1 percent and 2 percent of their woman were exclusively homosexual (vs. 4 percent of the men)"

[oFamous1]

If being Homosexual or Lesbian is not a choice, why are there almost 4 times the number of Homosexuals as there are Lesbians?

You would think that since we are all human, the standard dev. would be close. Can anyone explain this?

[WallyAnti]

@oFamous1

Your question is absurd. Lesbians are homosexuals so there cannot be 4x as many. You were probably trying to ask why there were 4x as many gay women than men.

Also how do you know that?

[oFamous1]

I posted a link to my source in another Rick Warren video.

No. There are 4 times as many Gay men than Gay women according to the survey. This article is on a Gay website. Let me find it again and post it up there.

The point is that if being Gay is a born trait, you would think statistically there would be an even distribution of the defect. Couple that with the ex-Gay phenomenon taking hold in the Gay community and I think you have to chalk the whole "Born Gay" argument as a farce.

[Babaretro222]

Im opposed to a turtle and a duck being together and calling that a marriage

[realreligion]

I like cheese.

[Babaretro222]

finally you pharisee phucks we agree on something

[CRAPPYNEIGHBOR]

I sincerely think mr warren should get a proper education.

[CRAPPYNEIGHBOR]

there are a lot of logical fallacies being made by rick warren in this interview.. everyone commits them at least sometimes, but fallacies are the at the foundation of rick warren's positions.

[xcal1968]

"If you think there should be two separate legal institutions for heterosexuals and homosexuals then you support segregation."

No. They're not the same thing. I'm not going to make the argument, because it really isn't the point.

How about this: Separate marriage from the government completely. The gov ONLY issues civil unions, based on two individuals living together, for the purpose of law/benfits/etc. And marriage can remain within the church, and certified by the church.

[bluespiral58]

If the definition of our social institutions never changed, we'd be living a stone age culture. Interesting that he opposes polygamist marriage, which was once widely accepted and yet he has no problem remarrying divorcees, which was once forbidden.

[derekrules420]

i agreed with him until 2:10

[faithdelusion]

He is homophobic, he just explicitly said that pedophelia is as bad as homosexulality

[jasmof82]

@faithdelusion he is reiterating the Bible and God's plan for union

[gilli004]

There are several cases in the Bible where older men married much younger women. Mary was in her early teens when her and Joseph joined together. In today's standards, Mary was a "child".

[GodHatesFAQS]

Ha ha ha ha... This guy is so out of touch.

[bhouseworth33]

That was awesome!

[protochris]

It's like saying I'm white, but I want to be an African American, and it's not equal if you don't classify me as one. You can't redefine the core of what marriage represents. Can you play basketball with a football and still call it basketball.

[jaredhutcheson]

There is an obvious fallacy with that. If my skin is white, I can't change that, I'll always be white. Anyone who would cry inequality for not being classified physically as something they're not is crazy and would be viewed as such. If you tried to play basketball with a football it simply wouldn't work, footballs don't bounce very well you see. There's a big difference between a game and a legal institution.

[jaredhutcheson]

The thing about marriage is that we CAN redefine it. At it's core, marriage used to not recognize interracial couples in this country. That changed. It has been redefined in law before. You can hold the personal view that gay marriage is wrong or that your god doesn't recognize it, but that's your opinion, not LAW. The law could recognize marriage as the union of any two consenting adults and there would be no legal complications.

[jaredhutcheson]

A gay marriage would function just as well within the law as a heterosexual one. The only thing preventing that from happening is bigots who fear change and think that their personal beliefs should influence law.

[hollywoodartchick]

Personally, I think there are reasons why the definition of marriage SHOULD change. It used to be a business contract only, and if you fell in love with the other partner in the process, you were lucky, but everyone expected it to just be an alliance between families to preserve wealth. The people who are asking for these changes want to marry who they LOVE, not a "beard" like in the past and have affairs on the side. This is a healthy change. It make society more honest.

[bluespiral58]

Religious freedom would allow any church to change its sacraments of holy matrimony. By the same token, secular society can change its institutions, including civil marriage, to ensure equal protection under the law for all its citizens. If our social institutions were never redefined, we'd be living in a stone age culture.

[misterscow]

marriage is a civil right, not simply a religious rite anymore. and definitions become expanded, that's just the nature of language and culture.

[Isabella8466]

RW is incorrect. Marriage has not been defined singularly for 6,000 years.

Currently there are four commonly used definintions for marriage.

Legal ... Social ... Cultural ... Religious

I was married in CA by a judge. The word God was not used in our ceremomy. This was a legal contract to the outside world.

The problem with both RW and many Christians, is they simply don't tell the truth.

[xcal1968]

He said 5000 years, not 6000.

Btw, you said "they simply don't tell the truth" and left us hanging. What did he lie about exactly?

[Isabella8466]

He has said 6,000 years in several interviews. It's in print.

The history of marriage disproves RW's comments.

[xcal1968]

Can you be a little more specific?

[jaredhutcheson]

As far as religious freedom goes, there are many Christian churches in this country that support gay marriage. If they want to perform homosexual unions shouldn't they be able to because its their religious right? Or will people then say that they're not practicing Christianity correctly?

[Albyiscool]

The state should only recognize civil unions. Leave marriage to different religions and churches as a ceremony to do whatever they want with it

[jaredhutcheson]

Yeah that's a good idea. And it doesn't only have to be churches that perform them. There can be secular marriage services because I'm sure plenty of non-religious people would still like to have ceremonies. No one "owns" marriage.

[smilinjoker]

he actually makes a very interesting argument here, but even though he supports equal rights, he doesn't suggest making any changes to support those. It's still discriminating.

[misterscow]

apparently, "[having] many gay friends and [eating] dinner in gay homes" qualifies you to limit their civil rights. is that the equivalent of spitting in someone's face, rather than stabbing them in the back?

[xcal1968]

"...qualifies you to limit their civil rights."

Did you even watch the whole video? He is actually in favor of gay people having the same civil rights as hetero.

[jaredhutcheson]

xcal1968:

If you think there should be two separate legal institutions for heterosexuals and homosexuals then you support segregation. He supports excluding certain people from a legal institution, something the constitution strictly prohibits. Of course, you could make the point: How can an institution that is defined as only heterosexual be discriminatory if it's not even capable of including gays because of how it's defined? To this I would ask you: Why should it remain defined this way?

[enigmatically]

Free speech issue? WTF? This guy is a total idiot who buys his own bullshit.

[Clemburke1111]

eni, I agree, this man is a homophobe but dances around it.