KING: Iowa Supreme Court just allowed same-sex marriage, making them the
third state; Massachusetts, Iowa and Hawaii. The general forecast is
that's coming. Other people are now saying, why not make
marriage a religious institution, and have the state bonding that the
non-marriage state issue. So we can have two kinds of getting together.
J. OSTEEN: I'm not sure I understand —
KING: In other words, if you want to be married and you're both
religious, go to your church. If you want to be bonded together and you
don't want to call it marriage, go on down to the civil servant office.
J. OSTEEN: I don't know if —
KING: The state will not marry you.
J. OSTEEN: Sure. I guess my thing, Larry, is I just like the definition
of marriage to be between a man and a woman. So it sounds like you're
saying something different.
KING: Well, it still would, except the state wouldn't perform it.
J. OSTEEN: Well —
KING: You could perform it.
V. OSTEEN: It would be called something else. It would be called partnering or something.
KING: By the state.
V. OSTEEN: Yeah.
KING: If the religious institution — I'm just throwing this out.
J. OSTEEN: Sure.
KING: Do you think, though, the other side is coming, that eventually
many more states are going to allow same sex marriage?
J.
OSTEEN: You know, I don't know where it's all going, but again, I just
— it's my desire that we keep the family unit, the basis of our
society — I'd love to see it stay between a male and a female, not
knocking anybody else. But I'm not sure where it's all going.
KING: If this continues, do you think it will harm things? Supposing
there were more states that had it. What would be the harm?
V.
OSTEEN: Again, you know what? We really want to see marriage between a
man and a woman. There is going to be people who get together and have
relationships and have what they call their families. But I just think
marriage should be sanctified by the church. It should be between a man
and a woman. But yeah, I mean they're doing it today.
KING:
The proposal is if that should happen, sanctified by the church, the
state shouldn't be in the marriage business. That was the other
proposal. Why should the state be — just throwing it out there.
J. OSTEEN: I don't know if I'm 100 percent clear on it all. But I
guess, Larry, we come back to that — will it undermine the basis of
society? I don't know. I think that — I know God's best is for a male
and a female to have a marriage and raise their family. It doesn't
always happen, but I believe that's much better.
KING: Should a gay couple be allowed to adopt?
J. OSTEEN: Well, I think that again, it's best for a male and a female.
I can't say — I'm not saying that gay people aren't good people. And —
KING: Or good parents.
J. OSTEEN. Yeah, exactly. But again, I like to shoot for God's best,
and that is a father and a mother in the home. It doesn't always
happen. I know a lot of people raised by single parents. And you know
what? We bless them and pray for them as well. but I think God's best
is a male and female.
