The Catholic Church regards animals to be part of God’s creation, and are therefore deserving of respect. But only men and women are made in the image and likeness of God. Moreover, animals do not share the same dignity as human beings. Nor are they capable of being held morally responsible for their behavior. As such, while animal welfare is imperative, in no way can animals be said to possess rights.

However, a new Gallup poll on morality reveals that Democrats and young people appear to be more concerned about the rights of Fido than his owner, Freddy.

When asked if abortion is “morally acceptable,” 78 percent of Democrats and 59 percent of those 18-34 agree; this compares to 20 percent of Republicans and 43 percent of those 55 and over. But when it comes to medical testing on animals, only 45 percent of Democrats and 35 percent of young people agree; the majority of Republicans (69 percent) and the oldest generation (52 percent) agree.

In other words, while nearly 8- in-10 Democrats are okay with abortion, less than half are okay with medical testing for animals. The majority of young people are also okay with abortion, but they draw a hard line when it comes to medical testing of animals.

Why are Democrats and young people showing more respect for the rights of Fido than Freddy?

From a wealth of survey data we know that Democrats and young people are the least religious; they are much more likely to answer “none” when asked what their religious affiliation is. How does this explain their moral choices?

What unites Democrats and young people, and what separates them from most Americans, is their penchant for autonomy. For many of them, autonomy is their god. Abortion, they reckon, is all about “bodily autonomy,” hence it is morally acceptable. The competing right of the child to live is given short shrift.

The interest in protecting animals cannot be explained by an affection for autonomy. Something else is going on.

Young people are more likely to own a pet than older people, and may therefore be more protective of their status. More important, however, is their relatively high exposure to videos and instruction on animal rights in school and social media. As for Democrats, they are more likely to take an expansive view of rights than other Americans (save for the life of the unborn). Because they fancy themselves as being open-minded, they regard an exclusive interest in human rights as chauvinistic.

We need to get our moral house in order. If we can’t conclude that Freddy should be awarded a higher moral plane than Fido, we are heading towards disaster.

The following report on assisted suicide was written by Catholic League senior policy analyst Nicholas Palczewski (a longer version is available on our website; it includes data on other countries).

Nationwide, support for doctor-assisted suicide is losing ground. Identical studies done in 2016 and 2025 by the Lifeway Research found that in 2016, 67% of Americans agreed with it, but in 2025, only 51% of Americans agreed.

What follows is a look at the six states that have the worst record.

California

Origin

The California End of Life Option Act went into effect in 2016.

Victims

According to the California Department of Public Health, between 2016 and 2024 a total of 8,242 people received prescriptions for life-ending drugs. Of this, 5,423 people ended their lives by ingesting the drug.

Legal Changes

In January 2022, SB 380 went into effect. The law reduced the waiting period between oral requests for medication from 15 days to 48 hours. It also removed the requirement for the patient to state a final attestation before receiving the medication.

Results

As a result of the passage of SB 380, California saw a massive spike in patients receiving end of life prescriptions. California public health data shows that between 2021 and 2022, the number of prescriptions written spiked from 863 to 1,204. Of the 1,204, roughly 78% of patients waited less than 15 days for the medication. As a result, the number of deaths significantly increased during this time period from 522 to 853.

Colorado

Origin

In 2016, two-thirds of Colorado voters approved Proposition 106 which allowed for the legalization of Medical Aid in Dying.

Victims

According to the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, between 2017 and 2024 a total of 1,995 people had received prescriptions for life-ending drugs. Legal Changes In 2024, SB 24-068 was signed into law. The law gets rid of safeguards in the original bill. These include:

• Reducing the waiting period for a prescription from 15 days to 7 days.
• Allowing a physician to waive the waiting period requirement if it is determined that a patient has less than 48 hours to live.
• Permitting a registered nurse to evaluate a patient’s status and prescribe the life-ending medication.

Results

The 2024 change to the law has led to a significant increase in patient prescriptions than in previous years. Between 2022 and 2023, the number of patients being prescribed life-ending medication increased from 317 to 398; between 2023 and 2024, the number increased from 398 to 510.

Hawaii

Origin

Our Choice Act took effect in 2019.

Victims

According to the Hawaii Department of Health, between 2019 and 2024 a total of 361 patients received prescriptions for life-ending drugs, ending the lives of 195.

Legal Changes

In 2023, amendments to the law were passed, including the following:

• Enabling advanced practice registered nurses to act as attending, consulting or counseling providers.
• Allowing licensed marriage and family therapists to be listed as counseling providers.
• Shortening the waiting period for obtaining a fatal prescription from 20 days from the initial request to 5 days. (The waiting period can be shortened to 48 hours if it’s determined that the patient is unlikely to live past 5 days.)

Results

In 2025, the Honolulu Star Advertiser reported that Honolulu police “opened a second-degree murder investigation after a doctor allegedly administer[ed] a lethal prescription dose to an 88-year-old woman in violation of Hawaii’s assisted death law.” Police allege the doctor failed to follow the rule which states that only the patient may administer the dosage. The report also mentions that “at one point [the patient] motioned for the doctor to stop, but he continued to administer the prescription.”

Oregon

Origin

Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act was initially approved by Oregon voters in 1994, but an injunction was issued. It was lifted in 1997, allowing the law to take effect.

Victims

According to the Oregon Health Authority, from 1998 to 2024, a total of 4,881 people received prescriptions for life-ending drugs. Of this, 3,243 patients died by ingesting the drug.

Legal Changes

In 2019, SB 579 was signed giving physicians the ability to waive the 15 day waiting period for people in extreme situations. In 2023, HB 2279 was signed repealing the residency restriction in the law.

Results

Health plans in Oregon have encouraged cancer patients to take medicine that would end their life. In 2008 a 64-year-old woman was diagnosed with lung cancer and was prescribed a treatment drug by her doctor. Her insurance company, Oregon Health Plan, refused to pay for the drug, but instead offered to cover drugs associated with medical aid in dying. That same year, Oregon resident Randy Stoup suffered the same experience when Oregon Health Plan refused to cover the chemotherapy for his prostate cancer, but offered to cover life-ending drugs.

Research published in the journal BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care in 2023 analyzed the effectiveness of Oregon’s medical aid in dying program from its inception in 1997 to present day. The researchers found that safeguards put into place designed to protect patients are increasingly being ignored at the expense of nonterminally ill patients. They concluded that:

• “Since 2010, various other diagnoses have qualified [for medical aid in dying], including non-terminal illness, such as arthritis, complications from a fall, hernia, and anorexia nervosa.”
• “The length of the doctor-patient relationship reduced over time…falling from 18 weeks, on average, in 2010, to 5 weeksin 2022.”
• “[In] the first 3 years of the legislation doctors requested psychiatric assessment in an average of 28% of cases. By 2003 this had dropped to 5%, and in 2022, just 1% of participants underwent psychiatric evaluation.”
• “In the first 5 years of the legislation, nearly a third (30%) of participants were concerned about being a burden. Since 2017, this has been cited by around half of those opting for an assisted death: 46% in 2022.”

There was also an instance where the life-ending drugs failed to effectively work. In 2005 a man terminally ill with cancer chose to end his life under the law. After completing the legal process, he got the fatal prescription, ingested the liquid “laced with powder from 100 barbiturate pills, and fell asleep. Three days later, he woke up and asked his wife why he wasn’t dead.” He told his wife that while he was unconscious, “God had told him that his action wasn’t the way to get into heaven.” He died from lung and bone cancer two weeks later.

Vermont

Origin

In 2013, Vermont Patient Choice and Control at the End of Life Act was passed, making Vermont the fourth state to legalize medical aid in dying.

Victims

According to the Vermont Department of Health, between 2013 and 2023 a total of 200 patients received prescriptions for life-ending drugs. Of this, 146 ended their lives.

Legal Changes

In 2023, a law was passed removing the residency requirement, becoming the first state to allow nonresidents to commit assisted suicide.

Results

Since the residency requirement was lifted, clinics and physicians have been overwhelmed by the number of out-of-state patients seeking to end their life. One physician said that it “has profoundly changed my life, our clinic function,” and “We just had a lot to learn about how to pull this off logistically.”

Washington

Origin

Washington’s Death with Dignity Act became law in 2009 after 58% of voters approved a ballot initiative in 2008.

Victims

According to the Washington State Department of Health, between 2009 and 2023 a total of 3,683 people received prescriptions for life-ending drugs. Of this, 2,768 people ended their lives.

Legal Changes

In 2023, SB 5179 was introduced and passed in the Washington legislature. The law reduced safeguards to existing law that sought to protect patients. These included:

• Allowing a physician’s assistant or nurse practitioner to make a decision on patient’s terminal status.
• Allowing a non-psychiatrist social worker or other mental health counselor to give a mental health evaluation.
• Removing the waiting period between requests for life-ending medication from 15 days to 7 days.
• Allowing for life ending medication to be sent via mail as opposed to receiving the drugs directly from a licensed pharmacist.

Results

Patients are also more and more likely to kill themselves for fear of being a burden. According to the State Health Reports, in 2009, just 23% of patients stated that the main reason they wanted to die was fear of “Burden on family, friends/caregivers.” In 2022, 59% of patients felt this way.

Conclusion

Sometimes it takes a personal experience before we change. Take the case of Montana State Rep. Greg Overstreet, who initially was a supporter of doctor-assisted suicide. When he was suffering from COVID and on a ventilator, doctors told him he had a slim chance of survival. He asked doctors to pull his ventilator after seven days, but extended it to two weeks after pleas from his wife. He soon made a miraculous recovery a week later. He noted that if it were not for his wife pleading him to extend the “do no resuscitate” order, he would not have survived. His experience led him to support the prohibition of the law.

It is striking to note that the six states with the worst record are also among the least religious in the nation. A recent Pew study of the 50 states and the District of Columbia listed California and Colorado tied for 39th, Hawaii was 43rd, Oregon was 40th, Vermont was 51st and Washington 37th.

Radical autonomy has become a secular God. Its consequences are deadly.

This Catholic League report details why the greatest child abuse scandal of our time—”transitioning” the sexual identity of minors—is so prevalent. It exists largely because of the policies adopted by elites in education and medicine.

Elite Education Organizations

Assoc. of Univ. Professors

In 2022, the AAUP issued a statement saying “academic freedom cannot be understood to support misgendering—referring to someone using a word or pronoun that does not reflect that person’s gender identity—or otherwise serve as an excuse for transphobia or the diminishment of trans, intersex, gender-nonconforming, and nonbinary persons and their lives.”

National Education Association

In 2018, the NEA released a report, “NEA Guidance on Transgender Students’ Rights,” that was meant as a resource to teachers. It offered legal advice on how to best advance these rights.

Elite Medical Associations

American Medical Association

In 2025, the AMA issued a document, “Transgender Individuals’ Access to Public Facilities,” that said that proper medical treatments for transgender persons include “genderaffirming hormone care, puberty suppression and/or gender confirmation surgeries.”

American Academy of Pediatrics

In 2025, a resolution entitled “Recognizing Transgender Patients and Providing Gender Affirming Care,” was ranked as the most important priority for its members.

American Psychological Association

In 2025, it said that treatment for transgender youth “should aim to help children and adolescents explore and understand, rather than change, their gender identity.”

American Psychiatric Association

It defines gender-affirming therapy as “a therapeutic stance that focuses on affirming a patient’s gender identity and does not try to ‘repair’ it.”

Elite Medical Schools

Harvard Medical School

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

Mass General is the teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School. It has a specialized gender-affirming care unit that “performs a variety of highly specialized gender-affirming surgical procedures tailored to meet the needs of transgender and gendernonconforming patients.”

Johns Hopkins Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

It has a clinic that is “designed to improve the health and wellbeing of gender variant, gender diverse and transgender youth and young adults.” These clinical services are available at the age of 5.

Stanford Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: No

Its Obstetrics and Gynecology claims “to be a leader in providing gender-affirming surgery.”

University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: No

However, it has a code of conduct that forbids “refusing to use the name or pronouns with which a person self-identifies” and “refusing to allow people to use single-gender facilities or programs most closely aligned with their gender identity.”

Columbia University’s Vagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

Columbia extols people to recognize “a person’s gender identity and using their correct pronouns” and demands the use of “gender inclusive language.” It has a section on youth and gender-affirming care for “children as young as 4.”

The David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

It specializes in “Facial Gender-Affirming Surgery.” It also gives these fellows some experience in chest and genital “reconstruction.”

Yale Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: No

While Yale has scaled back its Gender Program, it still promotes transgender ideology.

Duke University School of Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

It provides gender-affirming hormone therapy for children 16 and older. For younger children, it offers therapies to “delay puberty.”

NYU Grossman School of Medicine

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: Yes

Although NYU initially indicated it would comply with President Trump’s executive order preventing child mutilation, it has since reversed course.

Washington University of St. Louis

Offers “Gender Affirming Care” to Minors: No

While it stopped providing “gender affirming care” to minors in 2023, its transgender center continues to provide “gender affirming care” to adults.

Transgender persons need all the help they can get, and it is the responsibility of those in government, healthcare and education to provide it. Regrettably too many of those who work in these professions are functioning more as enablers than helpers, thus postponing the day of reckoning. There is nothing normal about being transgender, and the data prove it.

There is much talk about transgender persons being the victims of violent crime. This is true. But what is not generally said is that more often than not the persons who are victimizing them are transgender. Over half (54 percent) of transgender and non-binary persons have experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) in their lifetimes. This is not a statistic from some conservative entity—the data are provided by the pro-LGBTQ organization, the Human Rights Campaign.

In the general population, 41 percent of women and 26 percent of men have experienced such violence. Transgender individuals are 2.2 times more likely to face physical violence and are 2.5 times more likely to experience sexual violence than normal persons, i.e. those who accept their sexual status (known in the literature as “cisgender”).

In short, it is not bored frat boys who are roaming the streets on a Friday night looking to beat up trans persons—they are doing it to themselves.

Another false narrative holds that whatever maladies trans persons have, it is due to transphobia, discrimination, and the like. This skirts the real issue: their condition is organic, a function of who they are. It is not normal to be in constant rebellion against one’s nature. Not to admit to this verity is to aid and abet their abnormal condition.

Transgender individuals are self-destructive. In a study published last year by public health experts on IPV among trans women in the San Francisco Bay Area, it was found that they suffer from inconsistent hormone use and non-prescribed hormone use. These bodily altering conditions carry serious health issues. Also, men who “transition” to women are more likely to be prostitutes and drug users. Not surprisingly, they suffer from abnormal rates of depression and are more prone to suicide.

Dr. Paul McHugh is the longtime psychiatrist at Johns Hopkins Medical School. He knows this subject as well as anyone in the nation, having studied “people who claim to be transgender” for decades. His wording is precise: in reality, there is no such being as a transgender person. There certainly are those who claim this status, but the truth is there are males and females. That’s it. There is no third sex, or gender, never mind dozens of them, as some have absurdly claimed.

How, then, should we treat such persons? Gender dysphoria, the feeling that one belongs to the opposite sex, McHugh says, is similar to other “disordered assumptions about the body.” For example, he argues that it makes no sense to treat “obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction.” Similarly, treatment of trans persons should not be directed at the body. “The treatment should strive to correct the false, problematic nature of the assumption and to resolve the psychosocial conflicts provoking it.”

In a famous Swedish study, which followed-up on those who underwent sex-reassignment surgery—over a thirty year period—it was determined that such persons “have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population.” Their suicide rate does not increase in the early years following surgery, but ten to fifteen years later it does—it rose twenty times that of comparable peers.

If it’s not normal to reject one’s own sexual identity, it is even more abnormal to consider oneself as belonging to, at least in part, another species. Worse, this problem is growing.

The young man who assassinated Charlie Kirk, and his lover roommate, a trans person (he was “transitioning” from male to female), were both attracted to a “furry” subculture. Such persons believe they have human and animal traits. Many give themselves names, choose a species, and attend conventions with like-minded persons. Most of them are homosexuals.

According to Mary Rooke, who has researched the “furry” population, “Furry culture is overtly sexual. Online forums are filled with depictions of humans roleplaying as animals engaging in sexual activity. Still, what’s worse is that this subculture is a version of humanity that claims we are nothing more than animals, which also happens to be a core tenet of the Church of Satan.” In one survey of “furries,” it was found that 96 percent of male respondents and 78 percent of females reported that they viewed furry pornography.

Robert Westman, the man who killed two Catholic children in a Minneapolis church in August, was also a “furry.” A trans man, who falsely claimed to be female, had a furry girlfriend. He said she was the “root of my suffering” and a “catalyst” for the attack. He also regretted “experimenting” with his sexual identity.

Those suffering from gender dysphoria need the right treatment. What they don’t need is to be encouraged to think that the heart of their problems is external to them. That is a gross disservice to them and to society at large.

By and large, the media do not want to draw attention to how violent prone many trans persons are. It’s a cover-up, and it needs to end.

Violence among transgender persons is a growing phenomenon, and it is being fueled by extreme left-wing ideologies. Their targets vary, but anyone who supports capitalism or Christianity is particularly vulnerable to their attacks.

There is no transgender bank or registry that collects data on their violent behavior, but reports from responsible journalists suggest that their behavior poses an existential threat to the social order. Here are just three prominent examples.

• In September, the person who admitted to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, Tyler Robinson, lived with his lover boyfriend, who was “transitioning” from male to female. Kirk was killed because he was an outspoken Christian conservative.
• In August, the person who killed two Catholic schoolchildren in Minneapolis, Robert Westman, was a man who falsely identified as a female. He hated Catholics.
• In 2023, the person who killed three children and three adults at the Christian Covenant School in Nashville, Audrey Hale, was a woman who falsely identified as a male. She hated Christians.

There are many more such instances of trans mass shooters. It is true that most mass shooters are not trans persons, but that is of little relief; they make up about one-half of one percent of the population. What matters most is that a growing subset are being radicalized and drawn to violence.

Some of them initially get by the radar before the truth comes out. For example, Nicholas Roske is a violent left-wing activist who sought to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He also had three other Supreme Court Justices on his list to kill. We didn’t know until recently that he is a trans person who falsely identified as a woman.

Violent trans persons have friends in high places covering for them.

When the New York Times ran a story on Audrey Hale they never disclosed that the Christian Covenant School killer was a woman. Instead, they presented her as Aiden Hale, the male name adopted by the female killer. They said Hale was “being treated for an emotional disorder,” making it sound as if she suffered from an anxiety disorder, not a mental illness. ABC news did the same, referring to Audrey as “Alec.”

Law enforcement is also capable of covering for trans killers. In March, seven people were indicted for torturing and killing a man who falsely identified as a female, “Sam” Nordquist. But because some of the suspects were themselves trans persons, no one was charged with a hate crime. Such is the politics of “hate crimes.”

There is plenty of politics involved in this issue, and it is the politics of left-wing extremists. For example, Denver Communists says, “Transphobia, homophobia, misogyny, and the gender binary are all connected and deeply embedded in capitalist ideology. LGBTQ+ oppression developed with the emergence of class societies and the nuclear family under capitalism.”

In truth, it is in socialist societies like Cuba where homosexuals and trans persons have to hide—otherwise they will be punished. In the Middle East, Muslim-run countries are not exactly beacons of capitalism, and they are known for throwing queers off of rooftops. By contrast, the median income of gays in America is higher than what heterosexuals make. And they’re oppressed?

Most Americans have never heard of the Socialist Rifle Association. It is a left-wing group of transgender and communist activists who specialize in firebombing Tesla dealerships and the like. They have falsely accused innocent persons such as Charlie Kirk with calling for the lynching of trans persons, inspiring haters to pick up their weapons.

Armed Queers SLC is another group of left-wing crazies. They like to feature flyers with a hammer and sickle and rainbow flags, thus showing their support for communism and the radical LGBTQ agenda. Of course, they find a way to blame capitalism, tagging it as a source of oppression.

Antifa is the most well-known violent left-wing group in the country. It is increasingly attracting trans persons and it fully supports their extremist causes. Andy Ngo, the courageous journalist who has tracked this group more than anyone, calls it “Trantifa,” giving recognition to the sexual, as well as the political, basis of this movement. He has been beaten badly by these thugs (they dress in black, wearing masks), just for doing his job.

In July, Benjamin Song, a member of the Antifa group Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club and the Socialist Rifle Association, led ten of his followers—eight of whom were trans persons—in an armed ambush at an ICE detention center in Alvarado, Texas.

Ngo blames the media for selling the idea that trans people are being subjected to genocide, when in fact they are the ones killing innocent Americans. He adds that they suffer from mental health comorbidities and many are sociopathic. That’s a sick stew.

Most Americans want to treat people fairly, even if they disagree with their politics or lifestyle. That’s commendable. But when mentally challenged trans persons adopt a radical agenda, and are willing to use violence to achieve their goals, they must be treated as domestic terrorists. Fortunately, President Trump recently declared Antifa to be such an organization. Now it’s time to apprehend them.

Bill Donohue

Today is Transgender Day of Remembrance. According to GLAAD, the gay rights organization, “The Transgender Day of Remembrance is an annual commemoration of those whose lives were lost in acts of anti-transgender violence.” What they don’t say is that most of the violence against these people is being committed by other trans people. They would have the public believe that they are being killed by hate-filled heterosexuals.

Transgender Day of Remembrance honors the memory of Rita Hester, a man who falsely claimed to be a woman; he was killed in 1998. Others who are memorialized antedated the Hester murder. They are Chanelle Pickett, Debbie Forte and Monique Thomas; they were also men who falsely claimed to be a woman.

The more we know about these murders, all of which occurred in Massachusetts, the less convincing the narrative is that heterosexuals are a threat to the trans community.

After all these years, Hester’s case remains unresolved, but there are clear indications that he was done in by his own. His real name was William Hester; he changed his name when he “transitioned.” The 6-foot, 2-inch man liked to hang out in trans bars in Boston, dressed as a woman. After he left the Silhouette Lounge one evening, he went home to his apartment. Neighbors heard a lot of banging sounds and a loud yell. He was stabbed 20 times.

The police said there were no signs of forced entry, and that “the killer might have known the victim.” This suggests he was murdered by another trans person (they tend to associate with those of the same identity), though everyone is reluctant to draw the obvious conclusion.

Chanelle Pickett’s real name was Roman Pickett. Dubbed a “transsexual” by the Boston Globe, he was strangled to death five hours after he met William C. Palmer Jr. in a Combat Zone bar, located in the red-light district, in 1995. They hooked up at the Playland Café, one of Boston’s well-known “transsexual pick-up bars.” They smoked crack cocaine before heading to Palmer’s bedroom, where they had sex.

A jury found Palmer guilty of assault and battery, but not murder. He told the court he did not know Pickett was trans. But this account was shot down by several others, including Pickett’s brother, who also falsely claimed to be a woman. They said he was a frequent customer at the trans bar. Moreover, six trans people came forward admitting they had sex with him, and two of them testified against him.

Debbie Forte’s real name was John J. Forte Jr. He was dressed as a woman the night he was murdered by Michael Thompson in 1995. The killer said they were “messing around” and after he discovered Forte had a penis, he killed him. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Monique Thomas’ real name was Rufus Thomas. He was killed by George Stallings two months before Hester was murdered by asphyxiation. His body was found next to his bed. That does not appear to be a coincidence. We know that after he was sexually abused by a family member growing up, he became confused about his sexuality.

In other words, in three of the four most heralded cases where a trans person was killed—they are the basis of Transgender Day of Remembrance—the killer was apparently a trans person himself. And since we know that most of the violence against trans people today is an inside job, the day of remembrance should focus on the violence within their own community.

No matter, the temptation to deflect, to blame others, is too much to resist. The LGBTQ crowd likes to cite the 2022 U.S. Trans Survey as proof that they are victims of harassment. The evidence, however, is weak.

The “Health & Wellbeing” section of the survey says that some of the respondents (the percentages vary) claim to have been victims of harassment. But how do we know the claims are true? After all, the claims were not subjected to independent verification—the “findings” are all self-reports. For example, the document says that 50 percent of those who considered suicide were “verbally harassed.”

What constitutes “verbal harassment” is not said. Were they called names? They may have, but it would be useful to know how many non-trans people experienced name-calling over the same period of time—for all kinds of reasons (e.g., you are “too fat,” “too ugly,” “too nerdy”).

At bottom, no decent person wants to dishonor anyone who has been truly abused, verbally or otherwise. But when there is a calculated effort to deceive the public about the true nature of the abuse, we are dealing more with politics than honest reporting.

Bill Donohue

We often get complaints from members who live in apartment complexes or condominiums that homeowners association managers are too restrictive in dealing with religious symbols at Christmas. We decided to do something about it.

We have spent weeks putting together an email list of over 2,000 Homeowners Association managers. We are contacting them today. Here is the text of the letter.

Now that the holiday season is upon us, it is important that the religious rights of owners be observed. The Federal Housing Act (FHA) of 1968 prohibits discrimination by housing providers on the basis of seven characteristics, one of which is religion. Before 1968, HOA managers had a lot of leeway in enforcing policies that restricted religious practices, but that changed when the FHA was passed.

As interpreted by the U.S. Department of Justice, the FHA permits religious decorations on doors and in common areas. This would include a Jewish mezuzah and a cross. “Similarly, when condominiums or apartments have a common room that can be reserved by residents for private activities like parties or book studies, residents seeking to hold a Bible study or other private religious activity may not be discriminated against.”

It should be noted that the Eleventh Circuit has stated, “the Supreme Court has repeatedly instructed us to give the Fair Housing Act a ‘broad and inclusive’ interpretation.’” In other words, the religious rights of residents are presumptively protected.

What the courts take seriously is any selective enforcement of HOA rules. For example, to allow a menorah but not a nativity scene, or vice versa, is a clear violation of the FHA. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has ruled that a menorah is a religious symbol (even if it is not solely religious in nature). The crèche is also religious, but a Christmas tree is not—it is a secular symbol. This needs to be said because every year there are instances where these kinds of violations occur.

HOA managers have greater latitude in adopting restrictive rules for balconies. Balconies can be kept clear from displaying religious symbols; they are not analogous to doors or common areas. However, even if the rule is “facially neutral,” there can be a violation of the law if there is evidence of an underlying intent to discriminate.

In conclusion, there should be no attempt to favor one religion over the other, nor should there be any intent to discriminate.

Wishing everyone a happy holiday season.

William Donohue, Ph.D.
President
Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights
450 7^th Ave.
NY, NY 10123

Bill Donohue

Trannies, a.k.a. trans men and women, are freaking over the new passport policy. Gone are the days when self-identification was dispositive: new passports recognize only two sexes—male and female. Seems pretty basic to most Americans, but to a tiny group of sexually confused men and women, the sky is about to fall.

Under the pro-LGBT Biden administration, trannies could choose to reject their biologically determined sex and instead identify as “X” on their passport, but that option no longer exists. Still, there are those who adamantly reject what science dictates, pretending there is an infinite variety of sex identifications.

For example, it is popular in some circles to speak of 2SLGBTQIA+ people. This stands for Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer or Questioning, Intersex, Asexual. The + covers all those who still feel left out. Then there are TGNCNBI human beings. This acronym refers to Transgender, Gender Non-Conforming, Non-Binary, and/or Intersex. The decision not to offer the + option can be seen as offensive to those who insist on inclusivity.

Why are the trannies unhappy about the passport change? They say it discriminates against them. But as the Trump lawyers told the U.S. Supreme Court, which sustained their position, “A policy does not discriminate based on sex if it applies equally to each sex without treating any member of one sex worse than a similarly situated member of the other. And here, the challenged policy applies equally, regardless of sex—defining sex for everyone in terms of biology rather than self-identification.”

Trannies see this as government intrusion. Imara Jones, a transgender journalist, opines, “What this says is that you, as a transgender person, do not matter to the state, and the state gets to tell you who you are.” This is twice wrong.

Such persons matter a great deal to the state, which is why the State Department issued the new policy—to fix the unscientific policy of the previous administration. It is also incorrect to say, “the state gets to tell you who you are.” No, biology tells you who you are—your sex is determined by your father, not the state (which simply records it) and not the individual (who cannot change it). Facts, like nature, are stubborn, and factual statements about nature are particularly stubborn.

It is commonplace in the pro-trans camp to claim victim status. Lambda Legal, the LGBT law firm, says, “It’s understandable to feel scared, angry, or overwhelmed in response to the Gender Order and related federal actions.” But why? What is scary about having a passport that correctly identifies your sex?

The ACLU claims the new policy is “heartbreaking,” and risky to boot. “Forcing transgender people to carry passports that out them against their will increases the risk that they will face harassment and violence and adds to the considerable barriers they already face in securing freedom, safety, and acceptance.”

No proof is offered for this remarkable statement, but what is most interesting about this comment, made by Jon Davidson, senior counsel for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project, is his Freudian slip about trannies.

By arguing that the policy “out[s] them against their will” is to concede that their real sex identity is being exposed! After all, isn’t that what’s being outed? On another note, why does the ACLU assign a particular disease, HIV, to LGBTQ people? Another Freudian slip?

The Human Rights Watch is also sounding the alarms over pending danger. The new policy, it contends, “conveys the dangerous idea that requiring transgender and intersex people to share their sex assigned at birth is harmless.” But if our sex were “assigned at birth,” then how would it be possible to have “gender reveal” parties? To be accurate, what is being revealed in utero is not the gender of the person (that is a sociological term referring to expected norms for males and females), it is the baby’s sex.

If merely carrying sex ID were such a threat to human safety, why is it that Lambda Legal says, it is “not aware of any confirmed incidents where individuals have faced problems leaving or reentering the United States using an unexpired passport issued prior to the 2025 policy changes”? That’s right—no one has been beaten up by a TSA agent for misidentifying his sex.

The Trump administration, unlike the Biden team, believes that science should govern biological issues, not politics. Too bad many of its critics are on the wrong side of history, as well as science.

Bill Donohue

Pope Francis wanted the Catholic Church to be more welcoming to homosexuals and transgender people, and he allowed priests to bless same-sex couples. This was music to the ears of the German Catholic hierarchy, so much so that they began inventing their own rules governing homosexuals.

Francis thought they went too far, but this is what happens when reformers get carried away—they encourage a revolutionary response. Now the German Catholic Church is in a state of flux. But compared to their Protestant friends, they appear sane.

Lena Müller sports pink hair. She is not in the circus. No, she is a Berlin Protestant minister. She recently presided over a “poly wedding.” To be specific, she “married” four men. In keeping with the spirit of diversity, two of the guys were Latvians, one was Thai and the other Spaniard.

The minister belongs to the Evangelical Church of Berlin-Brandenburg-Silesian Upper Lusatia; it goes by EKBO. She promotes a “queer-inclusive” approach, and said the four men now constitute “one family.” Would God approve? Of course. “We saw that there was a lot of love between them. What could God possibly have against there being four of them instead of two?”

Did the EKBO approve this “marriage”? Formally it did not but that is because church weddings cannot be sanctioned unless they are a legally registered marriage, and polygamy is still prohibited by German law.

The EKBO had to bow to the civil law but that doesn’t mean they didn’t like what the renegade minister did. Instead of rebuking her, they stood by her, saying they were “appalled”—not by what she did, but by her critics. They even threatened legal action against her most vocal adversaries.

These EKBO Protestants have been actively subverting Christianity for years. That is their goal—to destroy Christianity from the inside. To wit:  they seek the “decolonization of hierarchical and Eurocentric prayer language.” This is short for hating Christianity and Western civilization.

Their agenda is purely political, having nothing to do with religion. They are committed to “dismantling hierarchical, essentialized, naturalized intersectional categories such as ‘gender,’ ‘sexuality,’ ‘race’, ‘class,’ ‘physical ability,’ ‘religion,’ etc.” In other words, they are in rebellion against human nature and the very stuff that constitutes society.

It boasts on its website that its texts “do not use binary language.” Translated, this means that the fictional world they live in does not recognize men and women. That’s too restrictive. Indeed, they take umbrage at the very word “women,” arguing that doing so validates the notion that such a biological group exists.

A few years ago, an EKBO bishop, Christian Stäblein, presented a declaration on “Guilt Towards Queer People.” He asked for forgiveness, but not for himself—that would undercut the hierarchical mantle upon which he can lecture the unwashed—but for the “interrogations” and “dismissals” that queers have allegedly endured at the hands of normal men and women.

This is the culture that the pink-haired minister was nurtured in, so it was hardly a big leap for her to “marry” four men. It wasn’t all that risky, and the fact that the EKBO elites rushed to her defense proves it wasn’t.

What’s next? If all it takes is “love” to justify a marriage, then Sam and Sally, brother and sister, can tie the knot. Indeed, they can add their cousins to the mix, Saul and Susan, and have a happy foursome. This is what happens when our imagination governs our thought processes, substituting make-believe for reality. It’s also what happens when those who want to subvert Christianity are seen as heroes.

Bill in the News (Catholic Connection): Bill discusses the USCCB’s decision to prohibit transgender care in Catholic hospitals. To listen, click here.