Q & A: Marco Rubio on His Faith of Many Colors
Since your faith has come up on occasion as a political issue, what would you say to those who suggest President Obama is a Muslim or not a "real Christian"?
I really don't endorse criticisms of the President's faith. I don't think they are fair, to be honest. One key thing about Christianity is that it requires voluntary acceptance of faith. If someone says he is a Christian, it is a sign of Christianity in and of itself. Christianity calls us to our salvation, and it also calls parents to contribute to their children's salvation. It calls us to be a light in the world. It doesn't call us to go around pointing other people out, saying so and so is deficient in their faith. It does call us to hold each other accountable. It's really asking us to look at ourselves, and that's really the only responsibility of Christianity. We're responsible for our own response to God's call in our life, and our own family's response.
When Obama uses his faith to defend same-sex marriage or other policies, do you think he's misinterpreting it?
I certainly don't reach the same conclusions he does. I've never criticized anyone for having their faith influence their public-policy decisions. If your faith is real, burning inside of you, it's going to influence the way you view everything. That belief influences your job and the responsibilities you have.
Are Christians who oppose gay marriage fighting a losing battle?
In terms of the Bible's interpretation of marriage, what our faith teaches is pretty straightforward. There's not much debate about that. The debate is about what society should tolerate, and what society should allow our laws to be. I believe marriage is a unique and specific institution that is the result of thousands of years of wisdom, which concluded that the ideal—not the only way but certainly the ideal—situation to raise children to become productive and healthy humans is in a home with a father and mother married to each other. Does that mean people who are not in that circumstance cannot be successful? Of course not.
It's not a discriminatory thing. I'm not angry at anyone because of it, but I also have to be honest about what I believe marriage should be in our laws.
Republican leaders seem to be shying away from the issue. Is that a strategic move, or should they address gay marriage more directly?
In the short term, the number-one issue threatening our country is the economy. We have to remain focused on the primary issue before us, the fact that millions of Americans have been out of work and that's what they look for their next President to help lead the way out of. That said, culture always matters. You can't have a strong economy or a strong country without strong people. Just like the issue of life, it will always be important, but because the President has presided over such failed economic policies, he is deliberately looking to have a debate about anything other than the economy. From a strategic point of view, we need to be cognizant of that. After all, our faith teaches us to be as gentle as lambs but as wise as serpents.
The Latest in Movie News, May 20, 2013
Star Trek Into Darkness
(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Newsletters
Google
Comments
Displaying 1–3 of 6 comments
See all comments
Maria Olafsdottir
Mr. Warner commented: "The contraception question has nothing to do with religious freedom of individuals to practice their faith as they see fit. It has to do with desire of some religious organizations to discriminate against their employees and not provide benefits or choices that normal employees are entitled to." This is untrue. "Normal employees" have never been entitled to employer-funded contraception-- a novelty imposed by Obamacare. A government mandate that a person or organization pay for items that the payer finds sinful and abhorrent is an assault on religious freedom. Under Obamacare, individual Christians must pay for insurance coverage for abortion, contraception, transgender treatments, and for other "treatments" they find sinful and abhorrent, and that they will never use. This is pure tyrrany.
Maria Olafsdottir
Mr. Warner wrote re: same sex marriage "if you don't believe in it, don't do it." Christians are concerned with children who are placed with same sex couples. Homosexual child sexual abuse far exceeds heterosexual. I have seen photos online of toddlers with "two dads." The affliction on that child's face was hauntingly sorrowful and despairing. Why, if, in the 60's, a marriage license was seen as a useless piece of paper, is marriage so sought after by homosexuals now? Why are they not satisfied with "civil unions"? Is marriage seen by some homosexuals as a stepping stone to legitimizing their access to children? Christian opposition to same sex "marriage" is not about a denial of "civil rights." It is about the safety of children, and that should be brought out. The public debate is silent on the safety of children from homosexual predators.
Steve Skeete
In response to this article my view is that the questions put to Mr. Rubio were tame and the answers provided very diplomatic. Mr. Rubio was not pushed, nor were the questions probing nor searching. He was allowed throughout to get away with superficial answers. There was nothing robust about the questioning and nothing forth-coming about the answers. Ms. Bailey appeared to be either limited or restrained from taking Mr. Rubio beyond certain areas of comfort and safety. As a result, for someone like me who does not know much about him, I remain at a lost when he speaks of “failures”, “faults” and “real mistakes" and imperfections. Ms. Bailey also failed to help by assuming that the “irregularities” and “financial slip-ups” he mentions are common knowledge. The interview appeared to move along mechanically and inexorably towards some designed course. At the end, I really do not know much about Rubio the potential Vice Presidential candidate, and precious little about his faith.