Failing of Journalists

Here is another news story about Gay Marriage, this time here in Ohio. The story does a good job of setting up a gay couple who are out to sue the local government. The motives of the Gay couple are discussed: getting turned down for a license will be the grounds for the lawsuit. The also story gets the opposite opinion from a minister and councilman from the Cleveland area who opposes Gay Marriage. Why do we not see printed motives for WHY this man opposes homosexual marriage? Why not at least stated that he opposes it because of his religion, which is what I would guess he would say. There may be other reasons he would try to state, but we don't read about those at all.

In most stories on Gay Marriage, we don't get details as to why people oppose Gay Marriage. We sometimes get generalities, but no details as to WHY they think Gay Marriage is bad. I blame this on the journalists and their editors. Either journalists are not asking the questions and not pressing for detailed answers or the editors are gutless to print them. Why would they be gutless? Well, in my opinion the only reasons to think Gay Marriage will harm anyone are mythical beliefs based on bigoted views about homosexuality. That conflict is not something newspapers want to address directly in news stories. The Peter Bronsons can address it, without giving details either, but reporters can't print it. Why the failing of the public interest?