The Lying Truth
If lies are upheld, the truth cannot be discerned and our court of law will no longer be an institution that can be trusted.
There is a court of opinion and a court of law. One requires nothing other than a belief, while the other is based on a preponderance of evidence. In the court of opinion truth is being blended in a Cuisinart along with beliefs and lies.
The difference between a belief and a lie is that a belief is something used to bring meaning or justification for our existence, while a lie is what we tell when we don’t know or care about the truth or don’t want to get into trouble.
The Wall Street Journal announced that they are banning the word “lie” from their journalistic vocabulary when writing about Donald Trump. The reason given for throwing lie onto a funeral pyre is that the President Elect has shown a proclivity for falsifying statements and calling him out would be labeling his “moral intent”. The Wall Street Journal decided that stating something a lie is not their job. Which begs the question, “if it isn’t the responsibility of a news organization to clarify what is belief, fact or lie, than whose is it?”
Historically, designating what is true has been everyone’s responsibility; parents, teachers, pastors, the newsroom, all the way up to the judge and jury in a courtroom. When a lie is not called a lie, it becomes a wavy line and that should be of concern to anyone who may one day stand as a defendant or a claimant.
President Nixon had a reputation for cherry picking the truth and blurring the reality of his actions. As did President Clinton. And in both those administrations the call for justice wasn’t heard or served as it would have for regular Americans. This isn’t a republican or democrat problem, this is a societal problem and one that will be our undoing if it isn’t corrected.
Children are taught language based on facts. They’re given a name, told what an apple versus a pear is, presented to a school, and expected to learn numbers and grasp rudimentary science. Between these lessons they are usually offered beliefs handed down by parents/religious instruction.
A child’s task is to discern the difference between belief and fact. Generally this education comes via the importance of telling the truth. They usually find this difficult to grasp because to a child not getting in trouble is a basic life function. With my own parenting experience I found this task harder when my kids realized I’d lied about Santa and I told a nice neighbor lady that we loved the cake she’d made and our opinion was the exact opposite.
Children need guidelines that make sense and are universal. When that doesn’t happen they are introduced to the beige area between black and white, bad and good. How big that beige area is and whether or not it changes depending upon how high up the food chain one rests has ramifications not only for children but for justice.
If a president, governor, senator, teacher, parent or voter were allowed to make fiction into truth, facts into opinion, and their lies left unnamed, it would enable people and presidents to receive a get out of jail free card. Lies holding the same weight as truth would make it nearly impossible to ascertain intention. Courts would have no clear basis for determining guilt.
Our actions are either singularly in our own self-interest or a combination of self-interest and well-intentioned interest for society and include an effort not to harm others. This is where belief, facts, and lying come in.
In a court of law when a witness raises their hand and swears on a bible “they will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, that is a culmination of parents, teachers, pastors, newsrooms, and our leaders setting forth an example of what is fact, fiction, belief, and lies. When that line is blurred there is no longer a preponderance of evidence, nor an ability to prosecute someone who has broken the law.
Discerning the difference between facts, opinion, belief, and lies is a basic structure for a functioning society—not as the Editor for the Wall Street Journal defines this as ascribing “moral intent”. Taking what by the preponderance of evidence has been defined as “facts” and turning them into opinion is a “lie”.
For example, a man punches another in front of a crowd of people and is videotaped. That is a fact. If the man claims that it didn’t happen, that is a lie. When a candidate for president says or tweets that they had a “massive landslide victory in the Electoral College” and all facts prove this statement false, that is a lie. In instances where someone “forgets” and is made aware of the fact that is backed by evidence, it is then their responsibility to apologize for the error. It is if and only if that person will not admit their mistake that one could claim the lie as having “moral intent”.
Keeping the line drawn between facts and lies, without a hint of beige is the responsibility of conscientious citizens who believe a democracy is worth fighting for. And yes Wall Street Journal, I’m talking to you and every other worthy news organization. Moral intent cannot be discerned unless a statement has been defined as a fact, a belief or a lie.
Call it what it is and let the facts fall where they may. Our system of justice and democracy depend on our vigilant stand for the truth.