When newspapers lie

Published June 3, 2015

by Pete Kaliner, talk show host on WWNC, Asheville, June 2, 2015.

I refuse to believe the editorial boards at the Charlotte Observer, the News & Observer, and the Greensboro News & Record are packed with people who cannot read English.

So, that leaves me with two other choices:

A. They are lazy and did not read a three-page bill before they wrote editorials about it.

B. They are purposefully lying in order to mislead the public.

There is so much wrong with the editorials these boards wrote about Senate Bill 2 (the marriage recusal act for magistrates), but I will focus on one simple and clear point.

From the bill:

Every magistrate has the right to recuse from performing all lawful marriages under this Chapter based upon any sincerely held religious objection. Such recusal shall be upon notice to the chief district court judge and is in effect for at least six months from the time delivered to the chief district court judge. The recusing magistrate may not perform any marriage under this Chapter until the recusal is rescinded in writing. The chief district court judge shall ensure that all individuals issued a marriage license seeking to be married before a magistrate may marry.

This is pretty clear, right?

Magistrates can recuse themselves from performing all marriages.

Recusals last at least 6 months (so people can't recuse and then recant their recusal depending upon who walks through the door to get a license).

Recusals must be rescinded in writing.

Everyone who seeks a license can get one.

Despite this clear language, the aforementioned editorialists argued:

The Charlotte Observer: "Religious freedom, of course, is one of the bedrock principles upon which the country was founded. That does not give each civil servant the right to serve some citizens and not others. People who cannot fulfill the duties of a job need to find a different job."

In a separate piece, the Observer's Editorial Page Editor, Taylor Batten, stated: "The bill would allow magistrates and registers of deeds to not facilitate same-sex marriages, which are legal in North Carolina."

The Raleigh News & Observer: "It would allow magistrates and registers of deeds to decline to participate in a same-sex marriage if such a union is contrary to their personal religious beliefs."

The Greensboro News & Record: "The bill would grant exemptions to magistrates and assistant and deputy registers of deeds who object to facilitating same-sex marriage."

Again... any magistrate who wishes to recuse himself from participating in the issuance of marriage licenses must recuse himself from issuing ALL licenses. Including the heterosexual marriages.

Based on their false premise, every one of these editorials go on to allege that SB2 discriminates - when it clearly does not. A magistrate either performs all marriages or none.

In other words, the opportunity for discrimination is eliminated.

Further, the bill clearly outlines how licenses shall be issued to anyone seeking them.

The numerous editors of these major North Carolina news publications told their readers that SB2 will do something it does not do.

So, either they do not understand the English language, they did not read the bill, or they are intentionally lying.

And none of these explanations bode well for a representative republic that is reliant upon an educated citizenry.