There is no religious organization in the history of the world that has ever taught that there are more than two sexes. However, in the 21st century, there are members of the clergy, and in other religious roles, who disagree: they believe that everyone who came before us in human history, including the teachers of their own religion, got it wrong.

Micah Louwagie is a woman who pretends to be a man and who calls herself “they/them.” She is a pastor of a Lutheran church in Fargo, North Dakota, and she says that the primary victim in the Nashville slaughter was the mass killer, Audrey Hale. Micah compared Hale’s death to the crucifixion of Jesus.

In March, the Episcopal Church issued a Resolution, adopted by the bishops, saying they “decry legislative initiatives and governmental actions targeting trans children and their families.” It would be more accurate to say they oppose legislation designed to protect children from those who seek to affirm transgenderism.

Daniel P. Horan is a Franciscan gay-friendly priest who recently branded the bishops as “evil” because they do not accept the myth of transgenderism.

Over 6,000 nuns recently published an open letter calling on everyone to support Trans Day of Visibility. The heretical nuns condemned the Catholic Church for “oppressing” trans persons, though they did not offer any evidence to support their baseless claim.

Rabbi Mychal Copeland brags that, “At Congregation Sha’ar Zahav, San Francisco’s LGBTQI synagogue, any day is a good day for drag. But this year, with drag under legal attack in some states, we felt it was especially important to hire drag performers for our Purim celebrations.”

Rabbi Elliot Kukla says he is “transgender and nonbinary,” and claims that in the Jewish tradition there are six sexes.

It used to be that those who cannot distinguish between reality and fantasy were called schizophrenic, and were treated in mental facilities. Now they are actively engaged in their churches and synagogues, anxious to inform the rest of us that we are the crazy ones.

March 31 was “Trans Day of Visibility,” a day that was supposed to “raise awareness about transgender people,” while also “drawing attention to the poverty, discrimination, and violence the community faces.”

Regarding the violence, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) said that “predatory cisgender” people are attacking transgender persons. That is a lie.

The dirty little secret is that trans people are the ones victimizing each other. It is not normal people (the so-called cisgender people—those of us who are comfortable with our father-determined sex) who are the ones attacking trans people. They are doing it to each other.

Psycom Pro is a psychiatry resource for clinicians, and last year it concluded that “More than half of transgender individuals experience partner violence or gender identity abuse.”

In 2020, seven experts published a study in the American Journal of Public Health on “Intimate Partner Violence in Transgender Populations; Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prevalence and Correlates.” They concluded that “Transgender individuals experience a dramatically higher prevalence of IPV [intimate partner violence] victimization compared with cisgender individuals, regardless of sex assigned at birth.”

The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence reviewed the literature on domestic violence in the LGBT community and found that “43.8% of lesbian women and 61.1% of bisexual women have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime, as opposed to 35% of cisgender women.” It also found that “Transgender individuals may suffer from an even greater burden of intimate partner violence than gay or lesbian individuals.”

The Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA Law, reviewed a number of studies on this subject. One of them found that “31.1% of transgender people and 20.4% of cisgender people had ever experienced IPV or dating violence.” It also said that three studies concluded that the lifetime intimate partner sexual violence prevalence among transgender people ranged from “25.0% to 47.0%.”

Even in sympathetic pop culture magazines, such as Portland Monthly, it is acknowledged that “statistically speaking, the most common perpetrators of violence against trans women are domestic partners.”

In addition, virtually every study concludes that trans people suffer from high rates of depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation and suicide, making it plain that this is a mentally challenged population. How much this contributes to their propensity for violence is not known.

We know one thing for sure: It’s not white, heterosexual Christian men who are roaming the streets looking for trans people to beat up—it is trans people who are committing the lion’s share of the violence. That’s the dirty little secret that the AOC’s on the left don’t want you to know.

Their demonization of normal men is bad enough, but that it is being employed as a cover up—as a way of deflecting the truth about who the violent ones really are—makes it doubly repugnant.

You will recall that last summer we did battle with the Connecticut education establishment over an assistant principal in the Greenwich Public Schools. Jeremy Boland was caught on tape admitting that he does not hire “hardcore Catholics,” and that is because they are “brainwashed.”

We immediately called upon school officials and lawmakers to deal with this issue with the utmost seriousness. An anti-Catholic bigot like Boland—the evidence is conclusive—does not belong on the public payroll in any capacity, much less as someone who hires school teachers and administrators.

Several investigations were launched, and we wrote to every person who was party to the probes. Some of the investigations are over; some are ongoing.

It was recently announced that Boland handed in his letter of resignation, effective June 30.

While we are pleased with this outcome, it is not enough. Will he be able to collect his pension? Will he be subjected to sanctions? Can he take another job in education? Would administrators who were shown to be bigots against other segments of the population be treated so lightly?

On another front, DirecTV has decided to reinstate Newsmax TV.

A dispute over the terms of their licensing agreement led DirecTV to drop Newsmax. At least that is what the carrier said. Newsmax contended that it was its conservative leanings that led to it being dropped.

Bill Donohue knows Chris Ruddy, the founder of Newsmax, and once the news broke on this story, he quickly rushed to his defense. Newsmax provides for diversity by allowing views not aired on most other cable TV channels.

Legions of others also came to Newsmax’s defense, putting pressure on DirecTV to settle this matter. Of the hundreds of VIPs who came to Ruddy’s defense, Donohue was the first to do so.

Both the Cos Cob case and the Newsmax case prove that those who treat our side unfairly can only be held accountable if we push back. There is no guarantee that we will win, but it is a sure bet that we will lose if we do nothing. Doing nothing is not the Catholic League way.

Maryland is historically famous for being home to religious toleration, a commitment born of delivering justice to Roman Catholics in the 17th century. Today it has become their enemy.

In one of the grossest injustices in the modern era, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore signed into law a bill that created two tiers of justice in cases involving the sexual abuse of minors: one for public entities and one for private entities. This kind of disparate treatment is not likely to pass muster in the courts. We are already in conversation with counsel on this issue.

This is all about money, not justice. How can anyone fairly adjudicate claims made about an alleged offense when the offender is dead and buried? He can, of course, because the claimant is not going after an individual—he is going after an institution.

If this were about getting guilty individuals, then trial lawyers would sue live-in boyfriends; they are the most likely to abuse a minor. But there is nothing but chump change there, so why not stick it to the Catholic Church?

The real topper is this: those who sue private institutions—and we all know which private institution will be targeted—can get awarded as much as $1.5 million, but if the exact same offense were incurred in the public sector, such as in a public school, the maximum amount that can be awarded is $890,000. This amounts to religious profiling, and that is why the courts will have a field day with this issue.

This law was inspired by an attack on the Catholic Church: No other institution, religious or secular, was investigated.
On April 5, Maryland issued the “Attorney General’s Report on Child Sexual Abuse in the Archdiocese of Baltimore.” The report’s stated goal was “to make public for the first time the enormous scope and scale of abuse and concealment perpetrated by the Archdiocese of Baltimore.” Unlike most journalists who have commented on this report, we actually read it.

The 463-page report does not provide the kind of clear-eyed accounting that would be expected. Rather, it buries critical information in “Abuser Narratives” that provide varying degrees of detail on the alleged offenses by the accused.

That did not stop us from doing a deep dive into the report, matching it up with data culled from the Archdiocese of Baltimore. Here is what we found.

Who were the alleged offenders?

The report lists 156 individuals accused of molestation dating back to the 1930s. Of that number, the Archdiocese of Baltimore had already published the names of 152 of these individuals. Two were nuns, four were male teachers, five were deacons, one was briefly in the seminary in Maryland before being kicked out, and 144 were priests.

Of the 156 named in the report, 104—two thirds—are dead. Another third, 51, are alive, but to our knowledge none are still in ministry; it is unknown if one is dead or alive.

Who were the victims?

Approximately two-thirds were male; approximately a quarter were female; the rest were both male and female.

When did the abuse occur?

Most of it was in the 1960s and 1970s.

Between the mid-1930s and the mid-1940s, instances of alleged abuse were zero. Between the mid-1940s and the end of the 1950s, there were an average of 20 allegations for each of the three five-year periods.

In the first half of the 1960s, the numbers increased to under 60; they then shot up dramatically to approximately 100 in the late 1960s. In the first half of the 1970s, there were approximately 100 alleged incidents; there were almost 120 in the second half of the decade.

In the 1980s, the number of accusations declined (there were approximately 120 incidents in the decade). In the first half of the 1990s, there were approximately 20 alleged incidents.

Between 1990 and 2019, there were virtually no instances of alleged abuse.

This profile is consistent with Bill Donohue’s own research. In his book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes, he found that almost all the molesters were homosexuals who preyed on postpubescent boys; they were either dead or thrown out of ministry. Almost all of the abuse took place during the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.

We have called on Maryland’s Attorney General and state lawmakers to launch an investigation into the sexual abuse of minors in the public schools. When USA Today did a study of every state, awarding a letter grade based on the degree of diligence exercised in dealing with this problem, it gave Maryland an “F.”

Maryland failed in providing adequate background checks; failed in offering transparency; failed in having strong mandatory reporting of teacher misconduct; and failed in sharing misconduct information with other states.

The gig is up. We contacted the Maryland Attorney General and all members of the legislature, asking them to launch a probe of the public schools.

Virtually every privately funded and publicly funded report on Christian persecution finds that communist and Muslim-run nations are the worst offenders. Conditions in the Middle East remain dire, and communist nations such as North Korea are just as vicious, but what is currently happening in China and Nicaragua commands our immediate attention.

North Korea makes plain that Christians have no rights, but, as Thomas D. Williams explains in his new book, The Coming Christian Persecution, matters are more insidious in China. It “offers a veneer of religious freedom but only on the communist party’s terms, and the state employs advanced surveillance methods to ensure that the content of Christian worship coheres with the ideology of Maoist socialism. Children under the age of 18 are not allowed in church for any reason.”

Williams does not exaggerate. They have a “Smart Religion” app that requires the faithful to register with the government as a condition of attending services. In other words, church attendance is not a private affair—it is the business of the communist government. Surveillance is ubiquitous.

According to China watcher Gordon Chang, the government is “moving in the direction where there will be no religious ceremonies or services ever permitted in China, because Beijing does not want religion in any place in China, even if it’s controlled religion.”

President Xi, the Chinese dictator, has instituted “Sinicization,” a policy where the government seeks to bring religious entities under his control, mandating eventual assimilation under the communist party’s rule. Those who are seen as resisting this forced compliance are punished. In fact, Christians are told they must display “enthusiasm, fervor and love for the party.” They must abide by what the Communist Party mandates, “Love the Party, Love the Country, Love Socialism.”

Xi chose to single out Cardinal Joseph Zen, the 91-year old former archbishop of Hong Kong, for a public display of his iron rule. Zen was arrested last year on trumped up charges of “colluding with foreign powers.” Zen’s layman counterpart in Hong Kong, Jimmy Lai, was sentenced to jail before Christmas last year for challenging the increasingly tyrannical rule; it is a reflection of Hong Kong’s subordinate status vis-à-vis China.

Nicaraguan dictator Daniel Ortega has been cracking down on the Catholic Church for the past five years. Priests have been arrested, missionaries expelled, and Catholic institutions have been shut down. A human rights organization, Nicaraguan Nunca Más, estimates that dozens of religious leaders have fled since 2018, and that Church personnel have been deported. In 2019, the regime blocked entry of international donations.

In February Bishop Roland Álvarez was sentenced to 26 years in prison and stripped of his citizenship. He was falsely charged with treason and undermining the regime. Pope Francis blasted his imprisonment, comparing what Ortega did to the Bolsheviks in 1917 and Hitler in the 1930s. In response, Ortega closed two Catholic universities and Caritas Nicaragua, the Church’s aid organization. More important, Nicaragua has recently suspended relations with the Holy See, and on March 18 the Vatican’s diplomatic headquarters in Nicaragua was forced to close.

All totalitarian regimes fear internal threats to their power. Old-fashioned authoritarian regimes, such as Franco in Spain or the Czars in Russia, didn’t care what anyone believed in, just so long as they were in control. They are examples of political dictatorships. Totalitarian regimes are political, economic, social and cultural dictatorships, and as such they are very much concerned about what its people think. Thought control is their signature.

Religion and the family stand in the way of totalitarian rule, and that is why they must be crushed. China and Nicaragua are both nervous about Christianity, and Catholicism, in particular, because they divert allegiance of the people away from the government. Hence, the move to force fidelity to the state.

For reasons not completely understood, Pope Francis has taken a hardline stance against Nicaragua and a soft stance against China. Catholics living in both countries deserve the strongest possible support from every nation-state, and that includes the Holy See.

During the Easter season, it is a good time to remind ourselves of the degree to which Catholics are the targets of violent extremists.

The U.S. State Department recently released its annual report on religious violence around the world. It found that “80% of the world’s population cannot practice their faith without serious restrictions or risk.” It listed 12 nations as the worst offenders. We researched who controls them and who their principal victims are. They are listed in alphabetical order.

• Burma. Run by Buddhists, Christians and Muslims are the targets.
• China. Run by the Communist Party, Christians, especially Catholics, and Muslims, are the targets.
• Cuba. Run by the Communist Party, Catholics are the target.
• Eritrea. Run by the Communist Party, Christians and Muslims are the targets.
• Iran. Run by Muslims, all non-Islamic religions are the targets.
• North Korea. Run by the Communist Party, all religions are the targets.
• Nicaragua. Run by the Communist Party, Catholics are the target.
• Pakistan. Run by Muslims, Christians and Hindus are the targets.
• Russia. Run by an ex-KGB agent, Jehovah’s Witnesses and evangelicals are the targets.
• Saudi Arabia. Run by Muslims, all non-Islamic religions are the targets.
• Tajikistan. Run by Muslims, all non-Islamic religions are the targets.
• Turkmenistan. Run by Muslims, all non-Islamic religions are the targets.

The Observatory for the Intolerance and Discrimination Against Christians in Europe recently documented more than 500 anti-Christian hate crimes, including four homicides, in 2021; the most vicious attacks were against Catholics. In addition to murder, there were approximately 300 acts of property damage. There were about 80 cases of theft, ranging from religious objects to consecrated hosts.

A new report from Canada showed that hate crimes against Catholics rose 260 percent in 2021; they were the most targeted of any religious group in the country.

In the United States, Catholic churches were targeted over 300 times since 2020. Recently, a Catholic church in Nebraska was ransacked.

Pro-abortion protesters have resorted to violence in several cities, and in the wake of the transgender mass killer in Nashville, many in that community have made violent threats against those who are critical of their radical agenda. The urban terrorist group, Antifa, is among the worst of the pro-abortion thugs.

In 1989, when St. Patrick’s Cathedral was invaded by gay terrorists from ACT-UP—they interrupted Mass and spat the Eucharist on the floor—Fr. Benedict Groeschel tried to calm down Cardinal John O’Connor by telling him it is a backhanded compliment that we Catholics were chosen for violence. The enemy knows who stands the strongest against them.
Much the same could be said today, though that should not be read as a plea for passivity. The violence against Catholics must end, whether it is coming from religious or secular extremists.

It has become increasingly obvious that there are two tiers of justice in the United States: one for those favored by the ruling class; and one for those whom the ruling class despises. Take, for instance, what is going on in the state of Washington.

On March 6, Bill Donohue wrote to Dr. Alan Spicciati, Superintendent of the Auburn School District in Washington about a bigoted remark made by a teacher, Kelly Love; she teaches at Auburn School District 408.

The letter Donohue received on March 21 from Vicki Alonzo, Director of Communications, said that Love’s remarks (a tweet) represented her own “personal opinion.” Moreover, she said, “Auburn School District staff members do not lose their First Amendment rights to free speech as a public employee.” Not a word was said about Love’s hate speech.

For the record, Love tweeted about another teacher’s interest in alerting parents to some school policies that were being kept from them. In reply, she said, “I cannot disagree with this more. So many students are not safe in this nation from their Christo-fascist parents.”

In Donohue’s letter to Dr. Spicciati, he said, “Such a sweeping anti-Christian remark runs counter to the Auburn School District’s policy on equity.” He then quoted from it, stating that “Love violated these tenets.” asked what he was going to do about this. Now we know—nothing.

Consequently, Donohue wrote to Chris Reykdal, Superintendent of Schools for the state of Washington. He noted that there are three problems with the response he received from the Auburn School District.

First, if Love had used an obscenity in a tweet discussing sports, that would be inconsequential. But her bigoted remark was aimed at the majority of Americans, and she no doubt has many Christian students in her classroom. How can she be expected to treat them fairly?

Second, there is the question of the Auburn School District’s equity policy. It is meaningless unless it is enforced.

“Students are affirmed in their cultural connections.” “Teachers are personally inviting.” It seems plain that Love cannot measure up to these equity standards. If she had made a racist remark against African Americans, are we to understand there would be no consequences?

Third, it is simply not true to say that public employees in Washington can say whatever they want. Not when it crosses the line.

In January 2020, it was reported by local media that Rafaela Kayryakoff, a first-grade teacher at Meridian Elementary School in Kent, tweeted that Mexicans were one of the “ridiculous immature vile cruel and extremely evil cultures that need to be genocided!” She also tweeted that “Jews dont [sic] belong in Christian countries what do they do not understand?” She also slandered Mormons.

After her principal learned of her tweets, Kayryakoff received a letter of warning from the district. She was accused of violating its equity policy, among other things. She was then required to complete an online training module about implicit bias. She was also sent to another school district. Finally, she resigned.

In 2021, Capt. Todd Miller, who served in the King County Sheriff’s Department, was suspended without pay for making a racist remark on Facebook. That same year, a detective, Michael Brown, was fired for posting a series of racist comments on Facebook.

All three of these state employees were sanctioned, in one way or another, for their bigoted statements. Yet absolutely nothing has been done about Kelly Love’s anti-Christian remark. This kind of duplicity is indefensible. Is there one standard for anti-racial and ethnic remarks, and another for anti-religious remarks?

Donohue asked Reykdal two questions. “Are you, too, convinced that Love’s case is purely a matter of free speech? If so, do you think the authorities erred in sanctioning the three cases I just cited?”

We made sure that a whole lot of people in senior positions in Washington knew about Donohue’s letter. We also asked our list of email subscribers to contact Reykdal.

We copied 81 notables:

• 14 staff members in the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
• 7 staff members in Gov. Jay Inslee’s office
• 2 law enforcement officials
• 9 Cabinet Members
• 16 State Representatives
• 8 State Senators
• 2 Directors of the Auburn School Board
• 5 members of the Auburn School Board
• 1 teacher
• 13 newspaper editors
• 2 Catholic dioceses
• 2 members of the state Catholic Conference

Knowing how protective the teachers’ unions are of their own, we don’t expect much to come of this. But the guilty teacher, Love, now has our complaint in her file. It is not likely she will go down this road again.

George Soros has been one of the most prominent philanthropists serving the radical left-wing agenda for decades. Everyone knows it, yet there is a coordinated effort of late to bail him out, saying his critics are “anti-Semites,” looking for a “boogeyman.” His allies are particularly miffed about reports that Soros is funding criminal-friendly district attorneys across the nation.

Here’s a recent sampling of efforts to brand Soros’ critics as anti-Semitic. In the last several weeks, the following news stories were written with that objective in mind.

• “Soros…has been a frequent boogeyman for Republicans. In recent years, they have often used the phrase ‘Soros-backed’ to attack Democratic candidates. Some have said this line of attack is an antisemitic dog whistle….” Josh Israel, americanindependent, March 22
• “This is how anti-semitism takes root and spreads.” Teacher’s union chief Randi Weingarten (quoted in above story)
•  “Democrats and outside experts have often described the attacks on Soros, who is Jewish, and the groups that received donations from the billionaire, as antisemitic.” cnbc, March 22.
• “Scapegoating Soros, who is Hungarian and Jewish, also perpetuates deep-rooted false ideas about Jewish people and immigrants to underscore the conspiracy theory that he is a shadowy villain orchestrating world events.” AP International, March 22.
•  “Mr. Soros…has been for years a boogeyman on the right, confronting attacks that portray him as a ‘globalist’ mastermind and that often veer into antisemitic tropes.” New York Times, March 24.
• “It’s a screaming antisemitic dog whistle.” Rabbi Doug Alpert, Kansas City Star, March 31.
• “[Trump] is using anti-Jewish stereotypes and historical hatred to raise money.” USA Today Online, April 1.
•  “Moreover, the repeated mention of Soros plays into antisemitic conspiracy theories….” Washington Post, April 1.
•  “[Rashad] Robinson also called the Soros attacks antisemitic….” Mediaite, April 1.
• “There is a centuries old antisemitic trope Erin about the sinister Jewish puppet master…and attacks on Soros are often either explicitly antisemitic attacks or dog whistle attacks, involving that trope.” Daniel Dale, CNN reporter (quoted in above story).
• “The increasing mainstream flirtation with antisemitic stereotypes and rhetoric has made the subject of attacks on Soros harder and harder to deny.” vox.com, April 3.
• “This has nothing to do with Soros…it has everything to do with a very old, antisemitic view that even though Jews are small in number, they really control everything.” Brandeis professor Jonathan Sarna. Washington Post, April 3.
•  “He’s Jewish, which brings with it all sorts of connotations if one wants to play on anti-Semitism.” Emily Tamkin, NPR, April 6.
• “Billionaire philanthropist George Soros has long been a bogeyman for the far right….The attacks, observers say, also smack of anti-Semitism.” Anuj Chopra, AFP, April 9

Not one of these persons who made the charge that Soros’ critics are driven by anti-Semitism quoted even one person to make their case!

As a critic of Soros, Bill Donohue has no problem being specific about his position, and it wouldn’t matter a hoot to him if Soros’ name was George O’Malley.

The following is taken from Donohue’s new book, War on Virtue: How the Ruling Class is Killing the American Dream (it was released April 18 and is available on Amazon and Sophia Institute Press).

“Many corrupt district attorneys—those who refuse to prosecute dangerous criminals—got their job with the help of Soros. He gave Alvin Bragg $1 million when he was running for DA in Manhattan in 2021; he gave George Gascón nearly $3 million when he ran for DA of Los Angeles in 2020. In 2022, it was reported that he gave $440 million to elect seventy-five ‘social justice’ prosecutors. The one thing he didn’t deliver was justice, especially for crime victims.
“Between 2016 and 2022, Soros gave more than $29 million to a personal network of political action committees specifically established to back radical DA candidates. By mid-2022, one in five Americans, or seventy million people, were living in a jurisdiction overseen by a Soros-backed prosecutor. Soros DAs were running New York, Chicago, Saint Louis, New Orleans, Philadelphia, and Los Angeles as well as many smaller cities and towns. Soros also received help from his prized client, Black Lives Matter, to lead the charge to defund the police and abolish prisons.”

No doubt there are anti-Semites who have attacked Soros, but it is scurrilous to tar all his critics as bigots. Soros is guilty as charged.

One final note. Soros knows a personal thing or two about anti-Semitism. As a young man he became a Nazi collaborator. In a “60 Minutes” interview, he admitted that he helped confiscate property from Jews. He told Steve Kroft that he never regretted doing so. When asked if this was difficult, Soros said, “Not, not at all. Not at all.” Stunned, Kroft said, “No feeling of guilt?” “No” came the reply.

October 2021—The University of Nebraska-Lincoln denied funding from the mandatory student activity fee to Ratio Christi to host a lecture because university officials required the student group to include another speaker with a different ideological perspective to counterbalance the invited lecturer. However, the university spends thousands of dollars each year hosting and funding events that are political and ideological in nature without imposing the same requirement.

October 2021—The University of Houston-Clear Lake excluded Ratio Christi from Registered Student Organization status and the benefits that come with that recognition because the student group required its leaders to agree with its values and mission.

April 2020—The Georgia Tech Student Government Association denied funding to the school’s chapter of Students for Life to host Alveda King because she is “inherently religious.”

November 2018—The University of Colorado refused to register Ratio Christi because the student group required that its members and officers be Christians.

June 2018—The University of Iowa deregistered InterVarsity Graduate Christian Fellowship because the student group required that its leaders be Christians.

June 2018—The University of Iowa deregistered the Sikh Awareness Club because the student group required that its leaders embrace its faith.

June 2018—The University of Iowa deregistered the Chinese Student Christian Fellowship because the student group required that its leaders embrace its faith.

June 2018—The University of Iowa deregistered the Imam Mahdi Organization because the student group required that its leaders embrace its faith.

June 2018—The University of Iowa deregistered the Latter-day Saint Student Association because the student group required that its leaders embrace its faith.

February 2018—Ball State University refused to allow the school’s chapter of Students for Life to access funds from the school’s mandatory student activity. Other student groups did not have their requests for funds denied.

February 2018—Kennesaw State University relegated Ratio Christi to a “free speech zone” because school officials believed that the group’s pro-life display was “controversial.” Even though the student group had secured a permit to set up the display in a prominent area on campus and the location was unoccupied at the time, school officials refused to allow the students to exercise their constitutional rights.

October 2017—Michigan’s Wayne State University refused to renew InterVarsity Christian Fellowship because the student group’s chapter constitution required its leaders to be Christians.

October 2017—The University of Iowa kicked Business Leaders in Christ off of campus because the student group required its leaders to sign a “Statement of Faith,” agreeing that they believe and follow the group’s religious beliefs.

October 2017—Miami University of Ohio refused the school’s chapter of Students for Life to put up a pro-life display unless it contained a “trigger warning.” Other student groups did not have to put a warning on their displays.

September 2016—Queens College refused to register Students for Life as an official student group.

September 2016—Colorado State University denied funding from mandatory student fees to the school’s chapter of Students for Life to bring a speaker to campus because university officials believed the speaker’s content “doesn’t appear entirely unbiased as it addresses the topic of abortion,” and the “committee worrie[d] that folks from varying sides of the issue won’t necessarily feel affirmed in attending the event.”

September 2015—North Carolina State University selectively enforced a speech policy against the student group Grace Christian Life. While other student groups could actively engage anyone in the student union, university officials restricted Grace Christian Life to speak only at the table they had acquired a permit for.

May 2015—California State University deregistered the Christian Fraternity Chi Alpha because the student group required its members to be Christian.

June 2014—The California State University system deregistered the 23 chapters of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship operating on 19 campuses because the student group required its leaders be Christians.

June 2014—The California State University system deregistered Chi Alpha, the student arm of the Assemblies of God, because the student group required that its leaders be Christians.

May 2014—Boise State required Abolitionists4Life to place warning labels on its pro-life displays and refused to allow the group to distribute fliers unless they were within the university’s “speech zone.” Other groups did not have these requirements.

April 2013—The University of Buffalo charged the school’s chapter of Students for Life nearly $650 for security fees to host an on-campus event. The university had no guidelines for applying such fees and other student groups were not charged security fees for their events.

February 2013—Eastern Michigan University denied funding from the mandatory student activity fee to the school’s chapter of Students for Life for a pro-life display because university officials believed the message was “too controversial, biased, and one-sided.” Other student organizations promoting controversial and ideological messages had no problem accessing funds.

July 2012—Oklahoma State University denied Cowboys for Life’s request to put up a pro-life display outside of the student union. Instead, the student group had to put their display in a less traveled area of campus. Further the school forced the student group to put warning signs on the display. Other student organizations did not have these requirements.

May 2012—The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill began investigating Psalm 100, a Christian a cappella group, for voting to remove a member whose views about homosexuality contradicted the Bible.

May 2012— The State University of New York at Buffalo stripped InterVarsity Christian Fellowship of official recognition because the student group asked a gay student leader to resign when he would not accept its belief statement.

July 2008—Michigan’s Wayne State University denied funding from the mandatory student activity fee to the school’s chapter of Students for Life because the university refused to award the funds to student organizations with a religious purpose.

January 2008—Spokane Falls Community College refused to allow the Spokane Falls Christian Fellowship to host a pro-life event because “Washington is a pro-choice state.” The school also forbade the student group from putting up a pro-life display because it was too “one-sided,” “biased,” “discriminatory” and “racist.” When the students complained about the decision, school officials threatened to have them expelled.

December 2007—The University of Montana School of Law derecognized the school’s chapter of the Christian Legal Society because it required members to be Christian.

September 2007—The University of Wisconsin-Madison denied funding to Badger Catholic, the largest Catholic club on campus, from mandatory student fees.

July 2007—The University of Florida refused to register the Christian fraternity Beta Upsilon Chi because the student group required all members to be Christian.

December 2006—The University of Missouri refused to register the Christian fraternity Beta Upsilon Chi because the student group required all members to be Christian.

November 2006—The University of Georgia refused to register the Christian fraternity Beta Upsilon Chi because the student group required all members to be Christian.

April 2006—Savannah State University axed Commissioned II Love because the Christian student group made its new leaders take part in a washing of feet ceremony, which the university deemed as hazing.

April 2006—Arizona State University required the school’s chapter of Students for Life to pay to insure an on-campus display even though there was no policy that student groups had to insure their displays and other groups did not have to secure insurance.

February 2006—The University of Wisconsin-Madison cut funding from mandatory student fees for the school’s Roman Catholic Foundation after the radical secular group Freedom from Religion Foundation complained that the university’s financial support of the student group was unconstitutional.

December 2005—After initially refusing to allow Arizona State University Students for Life to put up a display on campus, university officials only relented on the condition that the student group secured insurance for the display. There was no policy that student groups had to insure their displays and other groups did not have to secure insurance.

December 2005—California State University, San Bernardino refused to allow the Christian Student Association on campus because the student group’s proposed constitution included a statement on sexual morality and required members and officers to be Christians.

November 2005—California State University, Long Beach refused to certify Every Nation Campus Ministries because the student group required officers to profess their faith in Jesus Christ and adhere to a biblical code of conduct.

November 2005—San Diego State University refused to certify Every Nation Campus Ministries because the student group required officers to profess their faith in Jesus Christ and adhere to a biblical code of conduct.

November 2005—San Diego State University refused to certify Alpha Gamma Omega because the student group required officers to profess their faith in Jesus Christ and adhere to a biblical code of conduct.

November 2005—San Diego State University refused to certify Alpha Delta Chi because the student group required officers to profess their faith in Jesus Christ and adhere to a biblical code of conduct.

October 2004—The University of California’s Hastings College of the Law refused to recognize the campus Christian Legal Society chapter because the student group required its members and officers be Christians.

2004—The Washburn University School of Law stripped the Christian Law Society of funding because the student group required that its leaders be Christians.

2003—Louisiana State University (LSU) denied recognition to the Muslim Student Association of LSU because the student group restricted its membership based on religion and sexual orientation.

No teacher has the right to make bigoted remarks about the parents of students. Such an occasion recently took place in a school district in Washington. What follows is Bill Donohue’s March 6 letter to the school superintendent in charge of the school where this happened.

Dr. Alan Spicciati
Superintendent
Auburn School District
915 Fourth St. NE
Auburn, WA 98002

Dear Dr. Spicciati:

The purpose of this letter is to inquire about your school district’s response to the blatantly anti-Christian statement recently made by Kelly Love; she teaches at Auburn School District 408.

It has been widely reported that Love was upset with a teacher who sought to alert parents to some school policies that were being kept from them. In reply, Love said, “I cannot disagree with this more. So many students are not safe in this nation from their Christo-fascist parents.”

Such a sweeping and clearly anti-Christian remark runs counter to the Auburn School District’s policy on equity. Dr. Gary Howard, an equity specialist whose work is flagged on the District’s website, cites several “Culturally Responsive Teaching Practices.” Among them are the following: a) “Students are affirmed in their cultural connections” b) “Teachers are personally inviting” c) “Learning environments are physically and culturally inviting” and d) “Classroom is managed with firm, consistent, loving, guidance.”

Love violated these tenets. By calling the parents of Christian students “fascists,” she is clearly not affirming the “cultural connections” of these students, nor is she being “personally inviting.” Indeed, the environment she has created is anything but “culturally inviting,” and she sure doesn’t exhibit the kind of “love” and “guidance” these students expect.

If a teacher called the parents of Native Americans “Christo-fascists,” swift punishment would follow. It should not matter what the ethnicity of the parents is. What matters is that Christians should not be smeared by a state employee. That is a serious matter.

I would appreciate hearing from you about the disposition of this case.

Sincerely,

William A. Donohue, Ph.D.
President

cc: Erin Mersino, Esq.
Kelly Love