stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Rick Warren: Same-Sex Marriage Is Orwellian ‘Doublespeak’

by David Badash on December 7, 2013

in Marriage,News,Religion

Post image for Rick Warren: Same-Sex Marriage Is Orwellian ‘Doublespeak’

Megachurch pastor and now diet guru Rick Warren sat down with CNN’s Piers Morgan last night to discuss his views on a wide variety of issues, including same-sex marriage.

“How can you espouse genuine equality if you don’t allow gay people the same rights to get married as straight people?,” Morgan asked.

LOOK: Rick Warren Goes Nuts On Twitter, Attacks ‘Liberal Theology’ Out Of The Blue

Warren claimed that he believes in equality, but admitted he cannot support same-sex marriage because, he said, “I don’t get to change what God says.”

Warren sidestepped Morgan’s citation that everything in the Bible is no longer in effect, including stoning someone who looks upon one with lust.

LOOK: Rick Warren: Gay Marriage Would “Weaken” The Church

The Saddleback Church founder was a firm and ugly supporter of his home state’s anti-gay Prop 8. Last year, in discussing with Piers Morgan a video he had recorded in 2008 urging his members to vote against the legislation banning same-sex marriage, he claimed he never thought the video was anything but private. Warren then liked same-sex marriage to arsenic and to punching a guy in the nose.

But last night, Warren decided that his real issue with same-sex marriage is semantics.

“I’m more against the redefinition of the term marriage than anything else.”

And then came Warren’s real semantic argument.

“I don’t think other groups get the opportunity to redefine a term. For instance, if a Muslim says this is a term we use and all of the sudden I take that term and mean it for me. Well, that’s not right,” the pastor stated.

“Don’t take a term and and make it something different. Orwell talked about doublespeak, where words mean the exact opposite of what they used to mean.”

So, same-sex marriage to Pastor Rick Warren means “the exact opposite” of opposite-sex marriage.

Warren also falsely claimed that marriage comes from the Bible. Unpacking that for a moment, the Bible has existed for less than 2000 years, while marriage in many forms has existed for far longer.

Warren also claimed that historically, people around the world agree that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. In reality — and biblically — marriage historically has been the union of one man and as many women as he could afford.

The Saddleback Church founder’s work has extended into areas like Uganda. Only once has he publicly expressed disagreement with that country’s “Kill The Gays” bill, and only after extreme pressure to do so.

Warren also exposed his real anti-gay bias and white male privilege hypocrisy when discussing tolerance.

“Tolerance used to mean we treat each other with mutual respect even if you have major disagreements. Today tolerance has been changed to mean all ideas are equally valid. Well, that’s nonsense. All ideas are not equally valid.”

What ideas does Warren think are not “equally valid”? Same-sex marriage, certainly, is one.

But these who might worry that Warren will soften his views or come to embrace marriage equality should fear not. “I fear the disapproval of God more than I fear your disapproval or the disapproval of society.”


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


Agnus1919 December 7, 2013 at 1:46 pm

Marriage is a ~~legal~~contract that has nothing to do with any church.

Churches are allowed to perform ~~legal~~marriages…ONLY with permission of the government.

In order have a legal marriage performed in a church you must present the marriage license you applied for and received from your government, the church must fill out the remaining paperwork and file it with the government.

So you have a legal and religious ceremony combined.

Many churches used to and the Catholic church still does, not recognize legal marriages performed in a courthouse or any legal marriage performed in any other church

There is a separation of church and state and OBVIOUSLY….it is not for ANY church to dictate governmental legal contracts.

Any church may perform any religious marriage they choose, it is no different than first communion, bat mitzvah etc.

However, their religious ceremonies have no legal holding.

It's simple….the government needs to withdraw the current PRIVILEGES from churches to perform legal marriages.

RevDrJEBateau December 7, 2013 at 2:13 pm

I firmly agree with your description and could not put it any more plainly. It is exactly the way I have described it all along when I have argued in favor of same sex marriage (and I reject this term "Gay" marriage completely, it really upsets me when I see it, so we will leave that alone). Yes, it is true that the Bible describes marriage, but marriage existed even before the creation of the Bible, which in itself is a bastardized document. I hold a PhD in divinity, and yes, I called it a bastardized document. Most people do not understand just exactly what a piece of work that book that they so revere really is. But the King James version, which is the one that most people, most Protestant groups use, was commissioned by, none other than, King James of England, and it was assembled by priests and others from a group of documents which were written in ancient Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek and a smattering of other languages. They argued and picked and chose what they would put in it. They also argued over semantics and the translations, because there were words for which there were no English words that fit. An excellent example is the part in the New Testament that describes how Jesus fed the masses from woven baskets that only had a couple of loaves of bread and some fish. Well, that is not what it contained, it held bread, but also a triangular shaped pie similar to the Greek spinach pie or the Indian Samosa, but since there was no word for that, and since the pie had no meat in it, they decided to say that it was fish, since the king approved of fish. So that is what people believe that it was today. A translation error. There are many of them throughout the Bible. So those who firmly believe that what is written in this Bible is the spoken word of God believe in a lie, because it is not, it is a hodge-podge of documents, thrown together by these men appointed by a King, so that he could have a Bible for his kingdom. And yet these priests and ministers will point to this book and claim all sorts of things, such as proof that the Bible condemns homosexuality. Well, I hate to disappoint them, but there are three times as many sanctions against heterosexuality within this Bible as there are against homosexuality, so should we begin stoning heterosexuals now as well? Deny them employment, housing, marriage licenses? We can not base the decisions made in a democracy on the stories told in a book that was put together by a committee of men who did poor translation work hundreds of years ago. It is illogical to do so. And to sit there on a television show and to espouse such gibberish about it being double-speak and other such nonsense because this book, full of fallacy and translation error, tells him otherwise, is the height of ignorance. So let us remember that this is a democracy that is based on a separation of Church and State. That all citizens are Equal, and as such are entitled to Equal Rights under the Law. Thus the Law must be blind to the fact that the applicants for a marriage license are both men or both women, or a man and a woman. Their only concern is that it is two human beings, that is all, and that they meet the age and other requirements., are not coerced into the marriage (not a shotgun arrangement, etc.) and then they issue the permit. Because in reality it is a legal arrangement between the two parties, which may be formulated out of love and a desire to be together, but it is still a legal arrangement, and then becomes binding between them, and the state. Thank you very much.

tomchicago01 December 7, 2013 at 6:06 pm

I remember reading somewhere, some time ago, that the US government resisted for nearly 100years the move to credential the clergy to perform the civil contract that is marriage. They wanted it to remain a civil contract that had no religious context. Does this ring a bell with anyone else?

mexicanlaws December 8, 2013 at 9:26 pm

I think most people in the US are not aware of this, but in most Latin American countries, churches have no legal authority to marry anyone. In Mexico, the only legal marriage is performed by a functionary at the civil registry. No one else can marry anyone legally. Churches can only perform a ceremony (that has no legal recognition) after someone has been married legally by the Civil Registry. It is the same in most Latin countries. The church in Mexico has not been able to legally marry anyone since 1857.

StanJames December 8, 2013 at 11:30 pm

Interesting that Warren is on the war path again. About a year ago his son, who was always depressed, committed suicide

A cousin of mine had the same situation and his son committed suicide at about age 30, about 15 years ago Its only about 5 years ago that a cousin on that side of the family told me he didnt want to date girls

Almost certainly warrens son fits in one of two categories:

He was gay and one of the worst of the worst anti gay groups is the evangelicals ** aka soouthern baptists / born agains.

He was failng with girls and had the not uncommon according to a psych I know, a very common fear is that "if I cant succeed with girls, there is nothing else to do but "become gay" which is a fate worse then death.

BTW that was the problem with one of my sons for years – I didnt find out until I had him meet mathew shepards mom Judy in Annapolis in 2007 and he then admitted his fear.

Either way aolmst certain warren is to some extent responsible for the death of his son.

stvrsnbrgr December 7, 2013 at 1:48 pm

Here is a fact: The vast majority of Americans do not care what Mr Warren has to say, on any subject. He is a self-appointed "pastor" of a so-called "church". And that's fine. But his views are irrelevant outside of his congregation/constituency/customers.

This is a man whose mentally ill son commits suicide with a gun he bought on the internet. And "Pastor" Warren is moved to… publish a "faith-based" diet book. As one does.

This man is a fraud. He is running a very profitable business. He is selling nonsense to idiots. Endless supply. Bottomless demand. And he is, unfortunately, a readily available bright shiny object for the 24-hour news cycle. He can be counted on to make incendiary statements which add nothing to any serious discussion of the critical issues facing the people of this country.

When the media gives this charlatan the attention he deserves (i.e., ZERO), then he will shrink back to his actual size: small-minded bigot with a microphone and a "church" full of "believers".

teeveedub December 7, 2013 at 3:14 pm

Well said. I cannot believe that this hypocritical huckster has amassed the following that he has. His two primary motivators seem to be making money and aggrandizing himself.

StanJames December 8, 2013 at 11:31 pm

TAT church ttakes in about 10 million $$ a year. Warren claims he keeps only a mil for himself, while giving the other to "charity"

Have to wonder if that includes the various anti gay, and possibly even hate groups like FRC, and AFA

SeanLiberty13 December 7, 2013 at 2:07 pm

Nope. More uneducated trash from the uneducated trash Rick Warren. Orwell was writing about fascist barbarians like the illiterate Rick Warren.

kajunteddy December 7, 2013 at 2:28 pm

I really wish ppl like this would do their homework. If you look back to the 5th thru the 18th century, homosexuals were married and blessed in the catholic churches. So, its not completely out of the realm of thought that it can happen again.

russellsvocation December 7, 2013 at 3:46 pm

This man who puts his verbal hucksterism on display to remain in the public eye and preach his lopsided view of the Bible is why I found it impossible to feel sorrow and sympathy over his son. A son, who in my opinion, killed himself because he no longer wanted to live in the shadow of an overbearing and disapproving father.
It bothers me that 20,000 people are drawn to his words each weekend in his church, like moths to a flame. Reading history, it reminds me of the people who were drawn to another eloquent speaker; Hitler.

robnova703 December 7, 2013 at 4:24 pm

Dear Church People,
I have no interest in your religion.
We only want to be able to get married legally and recognized as such by the government.
Your church has nothing to do with my rights as a US citizen and you should not be able to influence the legislature to deny my rights.
I see your fat, please keep eating lots of greasy fattening food so your heart will stop and we won't have to deal with anymore of your nonsense.

tomchicago01 December 7, 2013 at 6:00 pm

Rick hides behind a venal notion of God to protect his vested interest in the "traditional" and mythical style of "marriage". What was a big, big moneymaker in the last few years is going to earn less and less as the congregations tire of holding on to the leaden notions of these guys.

saltcay December 7, 2013 at 7:42 pm

Wouldn't the opposite of "Opposite Sex Marriage" be DIVORCE? Why isn't Warren or any others of his ilk doing anything to make divorce illegal?

weshlovrcm December 7, 2013 at 10:49 pm

What saddens me is that this false prophet doesn't have the cajones to say what he really thinks. He reduces the whole issue to a semantic argument when he really wants to say, "I believe same-sex marriage should be banned, because I don't like it." Maybe he thinks that white washing his sin of homophobia might also encourage pro-equality Americans to continue sending him $$$.

gfisher61 December 8, 2013 at 10:20 am

>“I fear the disapproval of God more than I fear your disapproval or the disapproval of society.”

The key word, here, being "fear." It's all about fear mongering and controlling people.

sdfrenchie December 8, 2013 at 10:20 am

I resent the fact that so many bigots are named "Rick". It tempts me to change my first name, even though my brother is the only one who still calls me Rick. Rick Warren here, says the Bible is only 2000 years old. Well, Rick, perhaps the New Testament. The one you guys stole from the Jews is older. And even the Jews don't interpret it the same way you do because a) They're smarter considering it's their Torah, and b) The think Christians are idiots for the misinterpretations they make of their Scriptures and for believing the things in there that are purely things passed down through the ages by word of mouth. Especially since it goes back to the days of the first humans. And, for any Jew haters out there, If, indeed, Adam and Eve were the first humans (there must have been others created at exactly the same time since when they were banished from Eden they ran off to a city), if Adam and Eve were the first humans, then we are all Jewish regardless of race or religious pairing. So, knock of the bullshit and just use the New Testament. It's about a Jew, but was obviously intended for all people because it has the Golden Rule for humans to live by. And that means, Rick Warren, that you're wrong about same-sex marriage and Jesus doesn't give a damn one way or another. He would sit and have dinner and lots of nice wine with us just as he would with you. But you, sir, would be told by Him not to judge others lest ye be judged. Have a nice day.

labman57 December 8, 2013 at 12:21 pm

Remember, marriage should be between a man and his wife … and his mistress … and an occasional hooker or two … possibly ending in divorce — you know, the traditional way as God intended it to be.

I always have to heave a sigh and roll my eyes whenever self-proclaimed Christians indignantly declare that gay marriage defies "the word of God". This argument is both cowardly and disingenuous — using biased interpretations of cherry-picked biblical passages to justify their brand of social intolerance and religious self-righteousness.

Traditional marriage as described in the Old Testament would advocate the keeping of multiple wives, as well as a few concubines on the side. In other words, the Western definition and accepted aspects of marriage has evolved over time … and it will continue to evolve as we become a more enlightened society.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: