This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The ongoing culture war between those who adhere to Judeo-Christian principles on one side, and militant secularists on the other, is increasingly taking on a political dimension. While there has long been funding for anti-Catholic art exhibits, what’s relatively new is the decision by Democrats to force taxpayers to fund the radical LGBT agenda. This issue is currently at a fever pitch.

On July 18, at a hearing on funding for transportation and housing programs, members of the House Appropriations Committee got more than testy—they engaged in the kind of verbal abuse we would expect from cable TV talking heads, not members of Congress.

Rep. Mark Pocan, a homosexual Democrat, branded Republicans who disagreed with him “bigots,” resorting to foul language while making the case for the radical LGBT agenda. Worse was Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the most anti-Catholic pro-abortion Catholic in the House. She called her critics “terrorists.” After she was called out for her invective, she asked that her “offending words” be withdrawn. But the damage was done.

Politico, the liberal media outlet, published a fine piece on this story (none of the major dailies covered it).

“What Do Drag Shows, Pride Flags and Latino Museums Have to Do with Roads and Parks?” The headline, while baiting, hit on something real: Republicans are becoming much more aggressive in tackling social and cultural issues. Perhaps that is because they realize, as a Gallup poll recently found, that social conservatism is rebounding.

Some of the issues that are being hotly debated include providing for so-called gender-affirming care; diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives; the distribution of Pride flags; drag queen workshops, performances and documentaries; and dishonest exhibits that portray Hispanics as “victims.”

The national debt has never been greater, yet some members of Congress think we should pay for these ventures, several of which are morally offensive. They are taking their cues from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the influential gay activist organization.

To show how extremist HRC is, consider some of its objectives:

• It believes that it is acceptable to allow a person who misidentifies as transgender to use whatever bathroom he wants. In other words, women who object to showering with men have no rights.
• It contends that by ensuring safety and fairness in women’s sports that this amounts to a total ban on transgender persons from participating in athletics. However, transgender persons are not prohibited from competing against each other. But this is not what HRC wants—it wants males to compete against females, effectively destroying women’s sports.
• It contends that LGBT persons are being discriminated against if students and teachers are not forced to use “preferred pronouns.” In other words, it wants the government to abridge the free speech rights of students and teachers by mandating what words they must use when identifying those who have misidentified their sex, or who falsely think that they are more than one person (as in being called “they”).
• It is strongly opposed to parental rights. For example, it is opposed to state laws that notify parents if their child has chosen to adopt a transgender identity.
• It argues that age restrictions on drag queen shows—of any kind—are tantamount to discrimination against the performers. Moreover, it contends that protecting children from sexually explicit material is an expression of bigotry.

It is fashionable to say both sides are crossing the line these days. With rare exceptions, this is not true.

Those who are promoting the anti-science view that the sexes are interchangeable are all liberal Democrats. These are the same persons who want to gut women’s sports, allow boys to share locker rooms with girls, dictate what pronouns people must use, nullify parental rights, and expose children to perverted theater. To top things off, they want the taxpayers to flip the bill for their sick agenda.

Paradoxically, referring to those who object to this madness as “terrorists” may actually be a good sign. It suggests that the DeLauros of this world are losing, and in an act of desperation, the only ammo left in their armor is vitriol.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

There are extremists in both the Republican and Democrat parties, and some support violence to achieve their goals; this is true even among some self-described independents. But the enthusiasm for violence is clearly more popular among Democrats.

In a large survey recently released by the Chicago Project on Security & Threats, which is affiliated with the University of Chicago, researchers tapped hot button issues for Republicans and Democrats, seeking to measure support for violence. For Republicans, the issue was Trump; for Democrats it was abortion.

The report, “Dangers to Democracy,” found that 6.8 percent of Americans agreed that “the use of force is justified to restore Donald Trump to the presidency.” Among Republicans the figure was 9.5 percent. It also found that 12.3 percent of Americans agreed that “the use of force is justified to restore the federal right to abortion.” Among Democrats, the figure was 16.4 percent.

The Democrats were also more likely than Republicans to favor using violence to attain other goals.

One in four Democrats (25.6 percent) say “the use of force is justified to protect the voting rights of Black Americans and other minorities.” But when it comes to using force “to prevent the teaching of CRT [critical race theory] in schools,” far fewer Republicans (14.6 percent) were inclined to violence.

Among Democrats, 16.3 percent are in favor of using force “against the police to prevent police brutality against Black Americans and other minorities.” When Republicans are asked if the use of force is justified “to preserve the rights of whites,” 9.9 percent agree.

The inescapable conclusion is that Democrats are more comfortable endorsing violence to accomplish their goals than Republicans are in achieving their ends.

It is striking that neither the authors of the report, nor the media who covered this story, decided to highlight this conclusion. Indeed, an article by The Hill on the survey only mentions Republicans who support violence over the treatment of Trump, never mentioning that hot button issues for Democrats elicit more support for force. Sometimes it’s not hard to connect the dots.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Hemant Mehta is an atheist activist who is not too happy with Richard Dawkins, one of the most prominent atheists in the world. He is angered that his fellow God denier insists that “sex really is binary.” This should be about as controversial as saying the world is not flat, but in some circles it is cause for apoplexy.

Dawkins is someone whom Bill Donohue has mostly criticized, and occasionally defended, in the past. In 2016, Donohue called him out for his hate speech when he said, “I’m all for offending people’s religion.” In 2017, he defended the Englishman on free speech grounds when a left-wing radio station based in Berkeley, California disinvited him after he called Islam the “most evil” of world religions. Now Donohue is defending him once again.

Mehta holds to the anti-science view that sex is fluid. It is not. It is binary, just as Dawkins said it is. We are either male (XY chromosomes) or female (XX), notwithstanding the biological disorder that affects boys called Klinefelter Syndrome (XXY). That does not make for a third sex.

Dawkins is a biologist. Mehta is a blogger. Despite the glaring difference in credentials, the occasionally employed blogger is accusing Dawkins of “abandoning” science.

“What is a woman?” We know that Mehta can no more answer this question than can Ketanji Brown Jackson, but when Dawkins was asked to respond, he was not puzzled. “A woman is an adult human female, free of Y chromosomes.” Mehta says, “That flies in the face of what many scientists have said about the subject.”

What Mehta is referring to is the alleged category of “intersex” persons. Yes, there are rare instances of babies who are born with both male and female genitalia. Anomalies exist in nature. It is also true that there are people who suffer from polydactyly, a condition in which a person is born with extra fingers or toes. So what?

Father Tad Pacholczyk has a doctorate in neuroscience from Yale and did postdoctoral work at Harvard. Even those born with “confounding physiological factors,” he says, are either intrinsically male or female. In other words, humans are “marked by sexual ‘dimorphism,’ or ‘two-forms,’ namely, male and female. When problems arise in the development of one of these forms, this does not make for a new ‘third form,’ or worse, for an infinite spectrum of different sexual forms.”

Mehta is upset that Dawkins has previously said that trans people are similar to Rachel Dolezal, the white woman who claimed to be black. The analogy is apt: if self-identity is dispositive, then Dolezal is as black as the guy who claims he is a gal.

Finally, Dawkins insists that it is people like him who are being bullied today, not trans people. Mehta disagrees but Dawkins is right. It is true, as Mehta contends, that trans people are much more likely to experience violence than normal people are, but what he leaves out is that most of the violence against trans people is being carried out by other trans people. That’s the dirty little secret no one wants to talk about.

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

More than 30 congressional Democrats who call themselves Catholic recently issued a robust defense of abortion-on-demand claiming their position is entirely in keeping with the teachings of the Catholic Church. They know this is not true.

“The Statement of Principles,” led by Rep. Rosa DeLauro, was issued in response to the Supreme Court’s decision last year in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that overturned Roe v. Wade. The statement contains at least four egregious falsehoods.

First, the Democrats claim that in the Dobbs decision “the Justices stripped women of their right to abortion and escalated an ongoing reproductive healthcare crisis in this country.” That is a lie. The Supreme Court declared there was no federal right to abortion. It did not outlaw abortion in the United States; it left that decision up to the states.

Second, the Democrats are playing the typical pro-abortion game of interpreting survey data that validates their position. They claim that 68 percent of Catholics support “the legal protections for abortion access enshrined in Roe” and 63 percent “think abortion should be legal in most cases.”

A survey of Catholic voters taken a year ago by RealClear Opinion Research found that 82 percent support some restrictions on abortion. Roe effectively permitted abortion through term, and thus did not reflect the thinking of most Catholics, or, for that matter, most non-Catholics.

Third, the Democrats falsely argue that their extreme pro-abortion stance is consistent with the Catholic Catechism’s teaching on conscience rights. It is not. The statement quotes the Catechism as saying, “A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself.”

That is a selective reading of paragraph 1790. The statement never mentions the next sentence: “Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.” Shortly thereafter (1792), it explains that among the expressions of ignorance is an “assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy” and a “rejection of the Church’s authority.”

Fourth, the Democrats invoke “separation of church and state” by claiming that Catholics cannot “impose our religious beliefs and customs on others who may not share them.” That’s true, but it has nothing to do with abortion. Opposition to abortion is grounded in science, as well as in the teachings of the Catholic Church.

It cannot go without saying that abortion is regarded by the Catholic Church as “intrinsically evil.”

This is the article that appeared in the September 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Media bias is not new, and this is especially true when it comes to hot button issues such as abortion.

An AP-NORC poll on abortion conducted in late June resulted in four news stories that were picked up nationwide by various media outlets. In three of them, the headline was skewed toward a pro-choice position.

This is not unusual: reporters who write the stories generally do not write the headline. And headlines tend to be more sensationalistic. It is also true that most reporters, at least in the major media, take an abortion-rights position.

The survey was taken to see if public opinion on abortion had changed since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last year, sending the issue back to the states to decide. Alas, not much has changed: most Americans have never wanted to ban all abortions, and most have never supported all abortions. This poll did not dispute that conclusion.

But one might never know this by simply reading the headlines. Here are three of them:

(1) “Few US Adults Support Full Abortion Bans, Even in States That Have Them, an AP-NORC Poll Finds.”
(2) “Most Americans Support Abortion Access One Year After Roe v. Wade.”
(3) “Most in US Don’t Support Full Abortion Bans, Even in States With Them.”

There was another headline, however, which conveyed a somewhat different outcome. Here is what it said:

(4) “AP-NORC Poll: Most US Adults Support Some Abortion Limits, But Few Want Full Bans.”

The news story that followed the first and fourth headlines were identical. However, the first emphasized that most Americans don’t want full abortion bans, and the fourth emphasized that most Americans want some limitations. Both are accurate but they convey different outcomes.

In both of these stories, it was reported that “only about a quarter say it should always be legal.” That finding would likely come as a surprise to those who only read the first three headlines.

Why does this matter? Because in today’s soundbite society, where few have the time or attention span to read an entire news story, headlines carry more weight in influencing public opinion than they did in times past. The public is increasingly relying on tidbits of information provided by bloggers, social media sites, and news aggregates. Thus, when the headlines are skewed—and they are almost always slanted in a liberal direction—it is easy to deceive the public.

If it is true that “what you see is what you get,” it is also true that what you get—from reading news headlines alone—is often misleading.

This is the article that appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Bill Donohue

1979: This was the beginning of the Sisters. In San Francisco’s Castro District three men dressed in traditional nun’s habit walked the streets. One of them carried a machine gun. Then they went to a nude beach. It was then that they adopted the name the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

1982: A year after AIDS was discovered, the Sisters were upset, but they did not complain about the lethal sex practices that gave rise to AIDS; rather, they complained about the “fear and prejudice” that it was engendering. “Sr. Florence Nightmare” and “Sr. Roz Erection” addressed the issue.

1987: The Sisters were granted a tax-exempt status after trashing Pope John Paul II’s visit to San Francisco. The Sisters held an “exorcism” and a “Condom Savior Mass” in Union Square. At the event, they featured “the Latex Host” and referred to Jesus as “the Condom Savior.” They also burned the Pope in effigy.

1987: They staged a “Hunky Jesus” contest, something they do every year on Easter Sunday.

1989: On their tenth anniversary, they held many events, including one with “Sr. Psychedelia’s” rise from the dead, and “Pope Dementia’s Altered Boys.” They wore “only thongs and smiles.”

1989: At the “Condom Savior Mass,” the Sisters read from a text of the “Condom Savior Consecration.” It said, “The Latex Host is the flesh for the life of the world. Just as the Creator who has life sent us, we have life because of the Condom Savior. Those who feed on this latex will have life because of it. This is the bread that comes down from Heaven, and, unlike those who eat not and therefore die, those who feed on this bread shall live forever!”

1990: A staff writer for the Miami Herald said the Sisters were noted for “carrying a 20-foot replica of a penis” at its street events.

1992: At a rally in Sacramento at the Capital Christian Center, the Sisters held signs of the Cross with a pink inverted triangle in the place of Jesus; the inscription read, “Stop Crucifying Queers.”

1992: “On Parade,” a publication of the San Francisco Lesbian/Gay Freedom Day Parade and Celebration Committee, published an article by “Sister Dana Van Iquity” which said the motto of the Sisters is “Encroach not on my crotch!” and “Leave my loins alone.” He described the day’s events, including “Dykes on Bikes” and “Dykes with Tikes on Trikes.”

1993: At another rally at the Capital Christian Center, protesters held a sign, “Queer Alert: Fighting for Freedom From Religion.”

1993: Twelve years after AIDS hit, they demonstrated in Washington, “reeling in anger and despair” over five of their members who died of the sexually transmitted disease.

1993: The Sisters were banned from the March on Washington’s stage for being “too controversial and not the appropriate image” for C-Span and “the movement.”

1993: The Sisters are seen as so offensive that they incur the wrath of Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, the authors of a landmark book on gays, After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s. They say of the Sisters, “‘Fringe’ gay groups ought to have the tact to withdraw voluntarily from public appearance at gay parades, marches, and rallies, but they don’t care whether they fatally compromise the rest of us.”

1994: They served “holy communion wafers and tequila” to the congregation at a mock Mass.

1999: On the cover of the April 1, 1999 edition of the San Francisco Bay Times there was a full-page picture of a Sister superimposed on a cross-like photo with his hands stretched out, imitating Jesus on the Cross.

2000: In San Francisco, they held a Good Friday event where they sponsored a fetish fashion show that provided “a chance to get spanked” and free “Sticky Buns.” Dr. Carol Queen held her “Good Vibrations Dildo Fashion Show.”

2001: I petitioned the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of the Sisters, citing multiple examples of “vulgar, obscene and bigoted material against the Catholic Church and its members.”

2002: They celebrated Easter with an “Indulgence in the Park” event that featured a “clown-drag-nun” fundraiser, along with the annual “Hunky Jesus” contest.

2004: They spent the entire month of December bashing Christmas in Los Angeles.

2008: San Diego House of the Sisters—The Asylum of the Tortured Heart, which was founded in 2005, held a “Midnight Confessional Contest” that gave prizes to those with the “hottest confessions.” It was held in a gay bar.

2009: They held a block party in San Francisco where some of the men danced naked in the street.

2010: At the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts winter gala, the Sisters were asked to perform six musical acts in a “Nunway Noir” drag fashion show where attendees could “bask in the bloody gore of occult film screenings.”

2011: In a Daily Beast column, gay writer Andrew Sullivan called the Sisters’ “Hunky Jesus” event a form of “blasphemy.” He was so angry at them that he said, “This makes me feel like Bill Donohue.”

2018: The Multnomah County Library in Portland, Oregon hosted “Drag Queen Storytime with the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,” despite their history of anti-Catholicism. The event explicitly targeted kids 2-6.

2022: The Sisters gave an award for featuring Lil Hot Mess, “a man who dresses as a woman for children and one of the leading activists behind Drag Queen Story Hour.”

2023: A Sister won the “Free Choice Mary” pro-abortion award. The man, dressed with a nun’s veil, wearing a bra and panties, was featured holding a baby doll with a sign, “I Had A Choice.”

This is the article that appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The following entries are a brief summary of the actions we took against the Dodgers. As you can see, we were relentless, issuing one news release after another, contacting Catholic and non-Catholic notables in Los Angeles, taking out radio ads, calling out those who were duplicitous, publishing background material concerning previous battles with the “Sisters,” etc.

May 16—Catholic League president Bill Donohue writes to Manfred calling on him to intervene to stop the Dodgers from honoring the “Sisters.” Additionally, at approximately 10:40 A.M. ET, we issue a statement asking Catholic League members to contact Manfred to express their outrage.

May 17—At approximately 3:00 P.M. ET, the Dodgers tweet that they will no longer honor the “Sisters.”

May 17—Within moments of the Dodgers’ announcement, we issue a statement thanking Catholic League members for their efforts.

May 23—Donohue again writes Manfred expressing his disappointment with the change of course and asks for a meeting. We request Catholic League members to contact Manfred once more. Further, we call for a boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” that honors the “Sisters.”

May 23—We additionally publish a comprehensive report chronicling the anti-Catholic antics of the “Sisters.”

May 24—We write every parish in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles asking them to join in the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” In his letter, Donohue includes the report on the “Sisters” to galvanize support for the boycott.

May 25—We unveil that efforts to garner support for the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” will be a multifaceted approach and will include outreach to many prominent Catholic leaders in Los Angeles.

May 30—We write every Catholic school in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles asking them to join in the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” In his letter, Donohue includes the report on the “Sisters” to galvanize support for the boycott.

June 5—We publish the correspondence between Donohue and Peter A. Magowan, owner of the San Francisco Giants, from 1995 showing how the team at the time handled a similar controversy involving the “Sisters.” The stark contrast between these two incidents reflects the state of our culture.

June 5—We call on our members to contact California Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins about her invitation to honor the “Sisters” on the floor of the Capitol in Sacramento.

June 6—We announce the launch of our radio ad calling on Catholics to boycott the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” on June 16. The ad runs 25 times on KABC from June 6 to 9.

June 7—We contact 126 additional Catholic entities in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles asking them to join in the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” In his letter, Donohue includes the report on the “Sisters” to galvanize support for the boycott.

June 7—Several media outlets, including the Los Angeles Times, take note of the Catholic League’s radio ad urging Catholics to boycott the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” on June 16. The robust media response is indicative of the ad’s effectiveness.

June 8—We contact 236 of the most prominent Hispanic leaders in the Los Angeles area asking them to join in the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” In his letter, Donohue includes the report on the “Sisters” to galvanize support for the boycott.

June 12—Based on the success of our KABC radio ads the previous week, we launch a second round of ads urging fans not to attend the June 16 Dodgers’ “Pride Night” game. They run on KABC 25 times from June 12-15.

June 13—We issue a statement on MLB’s double standards in allowing the Dodgers to honor the “Sisters” while tacitly condoning the Blue Jays cutting Anthony Bass for expressing Christian beliefs. Additionally, we encourage our members to contact Manfred again for allowing the team to punish Bass for exercising his First Amendment right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

June 13—We contact 114 of the most prominent non-Catholic religious leaders in the Los Angeles area asking them to join in the boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” In his letter, Donohue includes the report on the “Sisters” to galvanize support for the boycott.

June 14—We announce that the Catholic Daughters of America joined our boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” honoring the “Sisters.”

June 15—We reach out one last time to everyone we have contacted since this fight with the Dodgers began. Once again we ask these important leaders in LA to support our boycott of the Dodgers’ “Pride Night” honoring the “Sisters” on June 16.

June 16—We post the Dodger “Code of Conduct” which states no religion can be disrespected at their games. Thus did they make a mockery of their own rule.

June 17—Our successful outreach campaign achieved victory as we drove down attendance at the Dodgers’ “Pride Night.” The stadium was practically empty when the “Sisters” were honored, and the few people in the stands booed.

June 19—Following our victory, we reach out to Commissioner Manfred and every MLB owner asking them to heed this as a warning. If they just play baseball, stay out of politics, and never again honor an anti-Catholic group, they can avoid the PR nightmare and the blowback it engenders.

This is the article that appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

MASS MAILING TO L.A. PARISHES ON “SISTERS”

Today we are sending our report on the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to over 300 parishes in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. In the cover letter, I am asking pastors to let their parishioners know about our response to the Dodgers giving an award to the “Sisters” at Dodger Stadium on “Pride Night”, June 16. We are asking Catholics not to attend the game.

We are grateful for the support of Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez and San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone.

The release of the report online yesterday was our first salvo against the Dodgers and Major League Baseball (it could have stopped the event). Today’s mass mailing represents our second response.

This will be an ongoing campaign over the next few weeks.

L.A. SCHOOLS CONTACTED ON “SISTERS”

Today we are sending our report on the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to 53 schools—elementary, high school, colleges and universities—in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. In the cover letter, I am asking educators to let their constituents know about our response to the Dodgers giving an award to the “Sisters” at Dodger Stadium on “Pride Night”, June 16. We are asking Catholics not to attend the game.

This will be an ongoing campaign over the next few weeks.

L.A. RADIO AD BLITZ v. DODGERS BEGINS

Starting today, for five consecutive days, we are running 25 radio ads (30 seconds each) on KABC asking listeners not to attend the June 16 “Pride Night” Dodgers game that features the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.” KABC is the ABC affiliate that covers Los Angeles and the Southern California area.

Due to copyright laws, we are prohibited from mentioning the Dodgers, or Dodger Stadium, per se. Everyone in the huge listening area will understand what the selected euphemisms mean (the stadium is also known as Chavez Ravine).

Here is the text of the ad that is being read by a woman chosen by KABC.

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, is asking Catholics not to attend the game at the Ravine on June 16. That is when an anti-Catholic group, the “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence,” will be given an award.

We are not asking Catholics to boycott all games. Just this one. By doing so, we will send an unmistakable message that bigotry against Catholics should not be tolerated.

If attendance dips on June 16, the entire league will take note. Please boycott this game.

AD BLITZ AGAINST DODGERS WORKING

KABC radio in Los Angeles started June 6 airing the first of 25 ads paid for by the Catholic League asking listeners not to attend the June 16 “Pride Night” Dodgers game honoring the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, an anti-Catholic hate group; it runs through June 9. The initial reaction has been very positive.

The Los Angeles Times just published a story, “Catholic League Launches Radio Ad Campaign Urging Boycott of Dodgers’ Pride Night.” While the story is not critical of the “Sisters,” it accurately conveys our stand.

Now we have been contacted by other media outlets asking permission to disseminate the ad. We are encouraged by this robust response.

It should be noted that while there are several lay Catholic groups that have weighed in against the Dodgers, the Catholic League is the only organization in the nation to launch an ad campaign. Coupled with our mass mailings to prominent Catholics in the Los Angeles area, we are proud to lead the way. Even critics of the overall Catholic response are citing our leading role.

We will have more to say tomorrow about the next stage in our campaign.

MORE L.A. CATHOLICS CONTACTED

Today we are contacting 126 Catholic entities asking them to spread the word about our boycott of the June 16 “Pride Night” Dodgers game that will honor the anti-Catholic Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. To that end, we are sending them a copy of our report that details the bigoted acts of this hate group.

We previously mailed our report to over 300 parishes in the Los Angeles archdiocese. We also contacted 53 Catholic schools, including colleges and universities. In each case, we asked pastors and educators to ask their constituents not to attend the June 16 game.

Now we are asking the Catholic leaders of the following archdiocesan entities to do the same: Residences of priests and brothers; endowments, foundations and trusts; retreat houses; hospitals and health systems; seminaries; and convents and residences for women.

Also ongoing is our radio ad blitz on KABC in Los Angeles asking area Catholics to boycott the June 16 game. Stay tuned for more announcements about our campaign.

L.A. LATINOS: SAY NO TO DODGERS “SISTERS” GAME

Today, the Catholic League will contact 236 of the most prominent Hispanic leaders in the Los Angeles area, asking them to spread the word about our request for area Catholics not to attend the June 16 Dodgers game that will honor the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, an anti-Catholic group of drag queens.

Our appeal is being made to the Catholic Association of Latino Leaders, the LA Latino Chamber of Commerce, the National Hispanic Media Coalition and the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals Los Angeles. All 236 leaders will receive a letter that details our request, and a copy of the report that I wrote about the history of anti-Catholic acts committed by the “Sisters.”

This brings to over 700 Catholic leaders we have contacted in Los Angeles asking them to tell their constituents not to attend the June 16 game.

ROUND 2 OF KABC RADIO AD v. DODGERS

We are so happy with the strong response to our KABC Los Angeles radio ad against the Dodgers that we have decided to do it again.

Last week, we ran 25 ads, 30 seconds each, imploring listeners not to attend the June 16 “Pride Night” game featuring the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence; the ads ran June 6-9. Our next round runs from June 12-15.

We will have more to say about the June 16 game throughout the week. It is important that attendance at this game drop below the attendance for last year’s “Pride Night” game. Major League Baseball needs to get the message—not just the Dodgers: Anti-Catholic bigotry should no more be tolerated than any other expression of hate.

NON-CATHOLIC VIPS CONTACTED

Our campaign against the Dodgers continues today with an appeal to non-Catholic leaders in the Los Angeles area. We are asking 114 of the most prominent members of the following religious communities to join our campaign: Evangelical Protestants, Mormons, Muslims and Orthodox Jews. We are sending them a copy of our report on the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

Our campaign has a defined goal: We want to drive down the attendance at the June 16 game that is honoring the “Sisters.” If we succeed in doing so, it will make it unlikely that other baseball teams will follow the lead of the Dodgers.

CATHOLIC DAUGHTERS JOINS OUR CAMPAIGN

We are proud to announce that the Catholic Daughters of America has joined our campaign against the Dodgers for honoring the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence on June 16. “We applaud the work that you do,” is how Kelly Carter of the organization put it.

The Catholic Daughters of America is comprised of over 60,000 Catholic women in the continental United States and its territories. On June 7, they passed a resolution condemning the Dodgers for their invitation to the “Sisters.”

The key to our protest is to persuade people in the Los Angeles area, especially Catholics, not to attend the June 16 game. If the attendance is down from last year’s “Pride Night,” that will be a very important cultural marker.

“LAST CALL” TO L.A. CATHOLICS

It all began May 16. That was the day we launched a massive email campaign asking our followers to contact Rob Manfred, the Commissioner of Major League Baseball, protesting the decision by the Los Angeles Dodgers to honor the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence on “Pride Night” June 16. The very next day, the Dodgers pivoted and disinvited the bigots. Then they pivoted again, reinviting them.

Over the past five weeks we have been relentless in our quest for a boycott of the June 16 game. We disseminated a report I wrote on the anti-Catholic antics of the “Sisters” wide and far, including a mailing to over 300 parishes in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

Our boycott will not extend beyond Friday night. We chose one game for one reason: Prudence dictates that we can’t get fans to boycott all Dodgers games. But we may be able to persuade them not to attend the June 16 game.

This is our “Last Call” to all of those key players in the Los Angeles area that we have contacted over the past several weeks. We are contacting all of them again.

This is the article that appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

Major League Baseball (MLB) was okay with one of its teams honoring a vile anti-Catholic group of drag queen bigots, but it was not okay with a pitcher who objects to the radical LGBT agenda. That was the principal takeaway in light of MLB’s response to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence being honored by the Los Angeles Dodgers, and former Toronto Blue Jays pitcher Anthony Bass’ rejection of LGBT extremists.

Everyone knows how Bud Light used a twisted cross-dressing activist to market its beer, triggering a backlash from normal men. Similarly, Target’s decision to market “tuck-friendly” women’s swimsuits that conceal male genitalia (the outfits are made for men who claim to be a woman yet refuse to have their sex organs cut off) inspired normal men and women to object. In late May, Bass posted an Instagram video that criticized the two companies.

The video included a plea by its creator, Ryan Miller, asking Christians to boycott Bud Light and Target. Although Bass did not personally comment on the post, he came under fire by LGBT activists and the front office of the Blue Jays. After the blowback, he apologized, but it was too late. His team dumped him, saying he was a “distraction.”

We have not heard a word from Rob Manfred about this perversion of justice.

We forced his hand on May 16 to nix the Dodgers decision to honor the “Sisters” (he was so bombarded with emails protesting this stunt that the next day the bigots were disinvited). But a few days later, he and the Dodgers succumbed to pressure from the LGBT crowd and reinvited them. So we know which side they’re on.

Manfred’s silence with regard to the Bass matter suggests he is okay with the player effectively being fired for exercising his First Amendment right to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Nothing in the video was obscene or insulting, but everything the “Sisters” do is both.

What kind of moral compass Manfred, the Dodgers and the Blue Jays are working with is a mystery. They have managed to sanction a vicious assault on Catholic sensibilities while simultaneously punishing those who reject LGBT mania. They are twice wrong.

This is the article that appeared in the July/August 2023 edition of Catalyst, our monthly journal. The date that prints out
reflects the day that it was uploaded to our website. For a more accurate date of when the article was first published, check out the news release, here.

The Dodgers and the Giants are not only longtime baseball rivals, they handle similar controversial issues in an entirely different matter. Over the past few decades, both teams have reached out to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, but after the Catholic League criticized each for doing so, their responses were quite different.

The Dodgers controversy was the most recent one.

The decision by the Dodgers to honor the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence on “Pride Night”, June 16, triggered a robust response from us: our email subscribers unloaded on Rob Manfred, Commissioner of Major League Baseball. The next day, the “Sisters” were disinvited. But then the Dodgers succumbed to pressure from the other side and reinvited them.

This is in stark contrast to how the San Francisco Giants handled a similar matter almost three decades ago.

In 1995, the Giants held a fundraising event to combat AIDS (which we applauded), but at the event were the “Sisters.” Bill Donohue objected and about a week later he got a letter of apology from Peter A. Magowan, president of the Giants; he pledged to never allow something like this to happen again.

So there we have it. There are two models: the responsible one, as exhibited by the Giants; and the irresponsible one, as exercised by the Dodgers.