Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the recent mass killings:

The media would have us believe that Christianity inspired the Atlanta killer, Robert Aaron Long, to go on his rampage. We are also told that Islam had nothing to do with inspiring the Boulder killer, Ahmed Al Aliwi Alissa, to go on his rampage. They are right about the latter but wrong about the former: In both cases, religion had nothing to do with their behavior.

Long and Alissa are alike in one sense: both have serious psychosocial issues and neither has any friends. That should be the focus of our concern, not their religion.

The professoriate was quick to blame Long’s Christianity for his killing spree. Susan Shaw, professor of women, gender, and sexuality studies at Oregon State University, was first out of the starting block. She traced his behavior to the “purity culture” of his Baptist upbringing. Many others followed suit. Indeed, blaming the “purity culture” became a mantra.

CNN’s Don Lemon cited the “purity culture,” as did feminist author Jessica Valenti. Trinity religion professor Mark Silk said it was the “evangelical purity culture” that drove Long. So did Katelyn Beaty, former managing editor of Christianity Today. Predictably, lgbtqnation, a popular gay website, came to the same conclusion. Ashlie D. Steven, a food specialist at Salon, agreed. None of these people are social scientists.

Perhaps the most creative critic of the Atlanta killer is Chris Hedges, a former reporter for the New York Times. He blamed the killings on the “rampant misogyny, hyper-masculinity and racism that lie at the center of the belief system of the Christian right, as well as define the core beliefs of American imperialism.” In other words, Long was not responsible for the murders—Christianity and American foreign policy were.

If Christianity is responsible for the Atlanta killer’s behavior, why is he such an anomaly? After all, most Americans are Christians, yet there is virtually no evidence that Christianity—which forbids murder—plays a role in mass shootings, or for that matter in shootings of any kind. There was, however, something seriously wrong with the killer.

As we have seen many times, most mass shooters are loners, men who have no friends. By itself, this condition does not cause someone to act violently—there must be other factors—but it almost always plays a role.

Nico Straughan went to high school with Long. He noticed that the killer was a “very quiet” individual. Another classmate, Jonathan Desire, said Long was “quiet, calm, and collected.” A female student who went to school with Long described him as “quiet and really to himself.” Another fellow student concurred, saying, “he didn’t have a ton of friends and really kept to himself.”

Yes, young people who don’t have friends tend to be quiet and keep to themselves. Importantly, Long was recently kicked out of his house by his family, leaving him even more alone. He was thrown out because of his internet pornography habit. As it turns out, Long was not lying when he said he was a porn addict. Indeed, he spent time in halfway houses trying to find a cure.

The Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office Capt. Jay Baker attributed Long’s killing spree to his desire to rid himself of his porn addiction. He said it was “a temptation for him that he wanted to eliminate.” Similarly, Tyler Bayless, who roomed with Long for a few months, said the killer would become “very emotionally distraught that he frequented these places.”

Marripedia is a social science encyclopedia that deals with many social and cultural issues. Regarding sexual addiction it says, “Pornography and ‘cybersex’ are highly addictive and can lead to sexually compulsive behaviors.” Moreover, porn addicts are “23 times more likely than those without a problem to state that discovering online sexual material was the worst thing that had ever happened in their life.”

This describes Long to a tee. He sought desperately to free himself of his porn addiction, choosing to finish the job by finishing the massage parlor women. Had he been an atheist, he would have acted the same way. It was his inability to form meaningful bonds with others, and his addiction to pornography, that is the root of his problem, not Christianity.

In the case of Alissa, the Boulder mass killer, he also suffered from severe psychosocial problems, though of a different sort from what bedeviled Long.

Alissa was paranoid and had a serious inability to control his impulses. His brother said that Alissa would describe “being chased, someone is behind him, someone is looking for him.” He also had rage issues: he had a police record for bursts of anger, assaulting students and threatening to kill members of the wrestling team.

Like Long, he had no friends. His brother labeled him “very anti-social.” A high school classmate noted that Alissa “didn’t really have a lot of friends.”

What links the Atlanta killer and the Boulder killer are a host of serious personal disorders and a serious absence of bonds. They are to blame for their actions, not outside forces. Christian bashing may make the bigots feel good, but it is of no explanatory value in understanding this issue.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Jay Leno’s apology to Asians:

Longtime NBC “Tonight Show” comedian Jay Leno has come out of retirement to apologize to Asian Americans for the bigoted jokes he told about them while hosting the late-night show. Will Catholics be next to receive an apology? Not a chance. The culture is too anti-Catholic to induce Leno to do so.

From 1997 to 2015, I wrote well over a dozen news releases taking Leno to task for insulting Catholics; I only addressed his most offensive remarks. For example, our files show that in one time period alone, from April 1996 to January 2012, we recorded 37 jokes Leno told about Catholics, some of which were inoffensive and some of which were not (only the latter merited a news release). In addition, I wrote many letters to his executive producer, Debbie Vickers, about his comments.

“Whenever we received a complaint,” Leno recently said, “there would be two sides to the discussion: Either ‘We need to deal with this’ or ‘Screw ’em if they can’t take a joke.'” Regarding his anti-Asian jokes, he now recalls, “Too many times I sided with the latter even when in my heart I knew it was wrong.”

In the late 1990s, Leno concluded he needed “to deal with” a complaint I lodged. He called me in February 1997 to discuss my concerns; I posted a news release following our discussion. I explained to Leno “why jokes about the Eucharist are not synonymous with jokes about Catholic school traditions.” He said he understood the distinction. He added that he tells 11,000 jokes a year and may sometimes go over the line. Fair enough. The conversation ended amicably.

Unfortunately, a few years later Leno started in again. Most of his  favorite “jokes” portrayed all priests as molesters. Evidently, he took the “Screw ’em if they can’t take a joke” approach; he never reached out to me again.

The single biggest problem the Catholic League has had with comedians like Leno is their penchant for making sweeping generalizations. Of course there have been miscreant priests. But to indict tens of thousands of innocent priests because some are rogues is indefensible.

If it is wrong to negatively generalize from the individual to the collective about other demographic groups, why is it acceptable to condemn all Catholic priests for the offenses of a few? And it’s not just Leno who has dumped on priests during his monologue. Many comedians have, and they have done so for years. Yet they are careful not to offend others, and if they do, they apologize.

All we have ever sought at the Catholic League is parity. We don’t ask for preferential treatment vis-a-vis other groups. We simply want a level playing field. Regrettably, that remains an elusive goal.

Contact Leno’s agent, Steve Levine: slevine@icmtalent.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a news story broken by the Washington Examiner on the employment policies at Cigna, a leading health insurance company:

The top officials at Cigna should resign immediately. They have willfully violated their own employment tenets and have adopted patently bigoted employment policies.

Cigna has a “Societal Norms” checklist that asks employees to “Check Your Privilege.” Among the choices are “Christian,” “White,” and “Cis-Male” (meaning biological males). This would suggest that Oprah is not a member of the “privileged class,” even though she is rich enough to buy Guatemala.

Telling Christians they are the beneficiaries of “religious privilege,” and that they need to admit this, is outrageously false and demeaning. Are those Hispanic Christians who work in housekeeping at Cigna “privileged”? What about the African American Christians who work in security? And why would atheist executives who are filthy rich not be considered “privileged”?

White males are demonized the most. Indeed, when making hiring decisions, employees at Cigna are asked to abandon their much-vaunted virtue of inclusivity: No white males need apply. According to the Washington Examiner, white males who apply for a job are sidelined, blocked from getting the post. This is obviously racist and sexist, and worthy of a massive lawsuit.

To make matters worse, Cigna lies about its discriminatory policies. One of its diversity officials recently said, “Our inclusive culture at Cigna means that we’re working hard to ensure everyone feels respected, welcome, and like they belong.” Really? Tell that to the white male Christians who are denied jobs because of their status. And how welcoming do Cigna staffers with this profile feel about working for a company that sees them as the enemy?

Senator Marco Rubio calls Cigna’s employment policy “grotesque and un-American.” He’s right. It is morally and legally indefensible.

Even worse is Cigna’s hypocrisy. “Cigna takes great pride in our diverse and talented workforce,” says its 2019 statement on “Diversity and Inclusion.” What they do not admit is how they blatantly discriminate against women and minorities.

Women comprise 77% of the workforce yet they hold only 31% of the Executive/Senior Officials and Manager jobs. Ethnic minorities comprise 34% of the workforce yet hold only 10% of these top jobs. So much for diversity and inclusion. Looks like it’s great to have women and minorities working at Cigna, as long as they know their place.

To top things off, of the 13 members of Cigna’s board of directors, 77% are white, 15% are black and 8% are Asian; there are no Hispanics. Males make up 77% of these positions; women are 23% of the board’s membership.

Cigna’s executive and management team also has 13 members. Whites are 85% of the total, while blacks make up 15%; there are no Asians or Hispanics. And just as the case with the board, 77% of these jobs are held by men and 23% by women.

Given the enormous gap between what Cigna preaches about how welcoming and inclusive it is, and what its workplace composition is—to say nothing of its highest paying jobs—fairness dictates that those on the board of directors and its executive and management team resign immediately. They need to set an example. They also need to junk their racist, sexist, and anti-Christian policies.

Contact Courtney Nogas, Cigna’s media official: courtney.nogas@cigna.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a sexual abuse bill that will not see the light of day:

The sexual abuse of minors has long been the subject of a proposal that would provide a suspension of the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania, allowing alleged victims to pursue their claims in court. To succeed, the House and Senate had to amend the state constitution, which they did in 2019; Gov. Tom Wolf signed the bill.

However, it was soon learned that the Wolf administration failed to initiate a public review process, thus stopping the proposal from being put on the ballot. To rectify this error, an emergency constitutional amendment was proposed, but it was killed on March 22 by state senate Republicans.

The real story here, at least for the Catholic League, is the unmasking of Rep. Mark Rozzi, the most vociferous lawmaker in favor of the bill.

The Catholic League has fought every proposed state law on this subject, wherever it has been introduced, that gives a free pass to public institutions. We know what the game is—”let’s get the Catholic Church.”

Unlike the public schools, which still have a serious problem with the sexual abuse of minors, the Church has long since cleaned up its act; current news stories are almost always about old cases of abuse. But that means nothing to people like Rozzi, a lawmaker beholden to the teachers’ unions.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairwoman Lisa Baker called Rozzi’s bluff. She offered an amendment to the bill that would apply equally to public institutions, eliminating the shield provided by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Her amendment would also have eliminated the limit on the amount of money victims could sue for (claims against public sector employees are capped at $500,000). In other words, the public schools would be treated the same way as the Catholic Church.

Predictably, Rozzi went ballistic. His only interest was payback: he claims he was abused by a priest when he was a minor. While we understand his anger, this hardly justifies his enthusiasm for a law that flagrantly discriminates against the Catholic Church.

If a lawmaker who was abused years earlier by a public school teacher were to introduce a bill that only targeted the public sector, giving Catholic schools a pass, we know what the teachers’ unions would say.

In 2017, Rozzi said he heard from “grown men and women whose lives had been destroyed by ministers of every denomination, scout leaders, public and private school teachers, coaches, missionaries, and worst of all, family members (my italic).” Yet he did nothing to help those abused in the public schools.

No institution, public or private, should ever be exempt from these laws. It is high time that every state repealed its strictures on sovereign immunity.

Contact Mark Rozzi: mrozzi@pahouse.net

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the ruling class’ obsession with race:

We are getting close to the point where if a white person says he prefers vanilla ice cream to chocolate, he risks being labeled a racist. The ruling class, in particular, is obsessed with this issue, seeing racism lurking behind every decision that adversely affects people of color.

We need to grow up. The first thing we need to do is get rid of the term “people of color.” It is meaningless. Asians have little in common with African Americans or Hispanics. Indeed, Asians have little in common with each other: The Chinese do not share a common history or culture with the Japanese, never mind with the Nigerians or Argentineans. The same is true of Hispanics—they vary considerably by their country of origin.

If the goal is to find racism, it is a sure bet it will be found. So when a self-confessed sex addict killed six Asian women in a massage parlor in Atlanta, the account he offered was immediately dismissed. He did not kill because he is a wacko, the ruling class said, but because he hates Asians. But if the massage parlor women had been Irish, what would they have said about that?

On March 20, a 66-year-old Asian man was punched in the face in Manhattan. Without missing a beat, the media said this was one more example of anti-Asian sentiment. But was it? The offender was a homeless man who walked the streets with a blanket. The assault happened in Chinatown, so the ruling class smelled racism. However, had it happened a few blocks away in the Bowery, no one would have suspected racism.

Last year, Catholic churches were burned and Catholic statues were destroyed—all by left-wing mobs—yet the ruling class never condemned these acts for being anti-Catholic. They are only interested in assaults on “people of color.” But even there, their select interest in anti-Asian crime is more politically motivated than it is a sincere expression of concern. Consider how it is being addressed.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki blamed President Trump for the recent attacks on Asians. Katelyn Beaty, former managing editor of Christianity Today, blamed Christianity: the shooter came from a “purity culture.” Similarly, Freedom From Religion Foundation noted that since the shooter was a Christian, the role his religion played must be considered. As usual, CNN fingered white supremacy as the major cause.

As it turns out, blacks, not white supremacists or white Christians, are disproportionately responsible for violence against Asians. But even here we need to be careful about putting too much stock in race-based theories. After all, most of the crime committed against blacks is done by blacks.

No doubt there are many reasons why Asians are being targeted these days. There is one factor, however, that doesn’t command the attention of the ruling class: the extent to which they themselves are responsible.

Everyone knows that Asians, on the whole, excel in school. They succeed so much that they have angered the white ruling class. Indeed, the elites resent the fact that African Americans and Hispanics don’t do as well in school, and it is this attitude that accounts for racial quotas in prestigious schools. More important, the ruling class has nurtured a culture of resentment, one that portrays Asians as unfairly getting ahead.

Last year, Asians in California worked hard to defeat Proposition 16, an initiative to reinstate affirmative action. Had it passed, it would have granted preferential treatment based on race, benefiting blacks and Hispanics, but at the expense of Asians. White liberals outspent their Asian opponents by a ratio of more than 20-1, yet they still lost.

The president of the Asian American Coalition for Education, Yukong Zhao, sent a message to white liberals. “Asian Americans will fight fiercely and defeat your racist policies wherever and whenever tried.”

This was an accurate observation—the quotas are racist. It does not matter that Harvard’s anti-Asian admissions policy was upheld by the courts. Of course, Harvard has a right to say that it can consider such personality traits as courage and leadership when making determinations for admission. But every honest person knows this is a ruse: such attributes have nothing to do with academic performance; they were chosen to limit Asian attendance.

What’s happening at Harvard is happening at Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Cornell, Brown, the University of California and elsewhere. It’s also happening in elite public high schools throughout the nation. In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio has done everything he can to keep Asians from taking up too many seats in the city’s select public high schools. Perversely, he also works against blacks by trying to destroy charter schools.

The ruling class, which is dominated by white liberals, says their anti-Asian policies have nothing to do with fomenting a culture of resentment against Asians. They would rather blame Christians and white supremacists. But to anyone who has seriously studied this issue, their rationale not only lacks evidence, it lacks common sense as well.

Bill In The News (Breitbart):

Catholic League president Bill Donohue notes “that many left-wing Catholics had confused the pope’s respect for the dignity of every person, regardless of their sexual proclivities, with approval for homosexual activity itself.” READ MORE HERE

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the way some Catholics are reacting to the Vatican statement on gay unions:

Freedom From Religion Foundation, an anti-Catholic organization, is not happy with the recent Vatican statement against gay unions and gay marriage. Interestingly, it blames left-wing Catholics, saying that it was the “continuing support of the Church by more progressive Catholics that makes possible these pernicious and demeaning pronouncements.”

Looks like the atheists at the Catholic-bashing entity spoke too soon. Today, a day after it posted its remarks, left-wing Catholics at the National Catholic Reporter attacked Pope Francis. The March 19 editorial makes it clear that they have finally had it with the pope, branding him a “hypocrite.”

This has been a long time coming. For several years, these renegade Catholics have hyped every welcoming move by Pope Francis to homosexuals, hoping to push him to recognize gay unions and same-sex marriage. However, the decree issued by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on this subject, done with the approval of the Holy Father, slammed the door shut when it reaffirmed the Church’s teachings on sexuality.

The editors at the Reporter said that the Vatican decree gave them “whiplash.” Why were they stunned? They cited several instances of the pope uttering kind words about homosexuals, suggesting they did not know the difference between condemning a person’s sexual orientation, which is morally wrong, and condemning illicit sexual behavior, which is morally right.

However, it would not be accurate to say that they really don’t know the difference. They do. They begrudgingly admitted that the pope’s outreach “did not change the church’s teaching on human sexuality.” So why the astonishment about the Vatican’s statement rejecting homosexual unions and marriage?

Catholic Church dissidents never like to throw in the towel. They dream of another day when their voice will be heard. The editorial says it “will take many years” for them to get their way. Don’t bet on it.

The fact is the Vatican decree was unequivocal, rendering all future changes impossible. Don’t take the Catholic League’s interpretation, read what the Vatican said. It explicitly said that “the Church does not have, and cannot have, the power to bless unions of persons of the same sex.” There is no wiggle room in that pronouncement.

It’s over. Left-wing Catholics have lost on gay sex—which is their favorite issue—now and forever.

Contact Heidi Schlumpf, executive editor at the Reporter: hschlumpf@ncronline.org

Once again state lawmakers attempted to bust the seal of the confessional, and once again they withdrew their bill under pressure from the Catholic League.

Two years ago it was California lawmakers who tried to violate our sacramental right. Last year it was Utah. This year it was North Dakota. All three bills were introduced citing the need to uncover information about the sexual abuse of minors allegedly learned in the confessional.

The bill’s co-sponsor, Sen. Judy Lee, asked that the legislation be withdrawn. Inforum, a media outlet that covers the Fargo-Moorhead area, took note of the role of the Catholic League.

“In a Jan. 20 letter, William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said that legislation to break the seal of the confessional was a ‘direct assault on our faith.'” Grand Forks Herald also cited our campaign, as did other North Dakota media outlets.

In the letter that the reporter referenced, Donohue raised three questions.

“Can you identify a single instance—just one will do—where it was later learned that a grave injustice was done to a victim of clergy sexual abuse owing to the failure of a priest to disclose what he learned in the confessional?”

“Can you identify anything learned by the recent 18-month investigation of the Catholic Church by the Attorney General of North Dakota that justifies such an egregious violation of the First Amendment rights of the Catholic clergy and the Catholic laity.”

“Can you explain why you have given a pass to the lawyer-client privilege and the exemption afforded psychologists and their patients?

Do they not learn of sexual abuse behind closed doors?”

Here is how we won. We enlisted the support of our email base of supporters [see our website on how to join] and they contacted Sen. Lee asking her to pull her bill. We also contacted all North Dakota lawmakers.

There is no evidence that victims of sexual abuse are being ignored by lawmakers—anywhere in the nation—because of the Catholic sacrament of Reconciliation.

Therefore, bills that target the confessional are not only unconstitutional—a clear violation of the free exercise of religion encoded in the First Amendment—they do nothing to bring justice to minors who have been abused.

We are proud of this important victory. When the state seeks to sabotage our sacraments—on wholly contrived charges no less—the religious liberty implications cannot be more serious. As such, this is a win for all religions.

Thanks to those who contacted the North Dakota lawmakers. They got the message, loud and clear.

Three hours after we listed the email address of a key official at Twitter, asking our subscribers to protest its decision to freeze the account of a Catholic media outlet, Twitter reversed itself and unlocked the account.

Catholic World Report (CWR) is a respectable Catholic media outlet. On January 24, it received notice from Twitter that its account has been locked for hateful conduct. CWR appealed but lost.

CWR posted the following tweet on January 19. “Biden plans to nominate Dr. Rachel Levine, a biological man identifying as a transgender woman who has served as Pennsylvania’s health secretary since 2017, to be HHS Assistant Secretary for Health.”

It was obvious that Twitter took offense to CWR’s description of a ‘biological man identifying as a transgender woman.’

This provided an opening for the Catholic League. Bill Donohue did not mince words. “Twitter is a menace to freedom. It needs to be reined in by the Congress.” To punctuate his point, Donohue quoted Pope Francis saying gender ideology is “demonic.” Would that make the pope a purveyor of hate speech? Donohue asked, “I dare Twitter to silence the Holy Father. Let’s get this settled right now.”

Meanwhile, we asked our subscribers to demand that Twitter reinstate CWR. We made this request at roughly 1:00 p.m. on January 29. Three hours later, after being pounded by our supporters, Twitter notified CWR that its account was being unlocked.

This was a major victory for free speech.

William A. Donohue

In the December edition of “President’s Desk,” I wrote a piece titled, “Buckle Your Seat Belts—Again.” I referenced a “President’s Desk” essay I wrote in December 2008 wherein I noted that we were smack right in the middle of a culture war. I added, “the culture war is about to explode.”

My point was that the victory by Barack Obama and Joe Biden would embolden the left, and that would not bode well for Catholics. Whenever progressives take command of Washington, their influence is felt way beyond the Beltway. This time around, with Biden in the White House, I predicted matters would get worse.

Looks like I was right. Just read this issue of Catalyst for evidence.

North Dakota lawmakers wasted no time sponsoring a bill that would break the seal of the Confessional. We wasted no time marshalling our resources, asking our base of email supporters to jam their email accounts. We pushed back hard and they eventually capitulated. But the fact that in 2021 we are still fighting to protect the sacraments of the Catholic Church from government bullies is not a good sign.

Similarly, it was not a good sign when pro-abortion protesters crashed St. Joseph’s Cathedral in Columbus, Ohio during a pro-life Mass. Columbus Bishop Robert Brennan, who was the celebrant, acted responsibly, as did the local police; the church-busters were quickly removed. But again, why are we faced with such a Nazi-like event in 2021?

Twitter has a reputation of censoring conservative voices on the internet. Over the winter, it censored Catholic World Report (CWR), a reputable Catholic publication, for the crime of noting that Biden appointed “a biological man” who identifies as a transgender woman to a senior health post in his administration. That was true. Moreover, there was nothing hateful, as Twitter charged, about the article. But its description of the sex of the official was apparently too much for the tolerant ones at Twitter.

Ironically, our defense of the publication did not lead Twitter to cancel us. Maybe that is because I quoted the pope saying gender ideology is “demonic.” Do they really want to take on the Holy Father?

We were the only Catholic organization to come to the defense of CWR. We did more than that—we won. Literally three hours after we asked our email subscribers to contact Twitter, CWR had its account unlocked.

Catholics get blamed for everything. When a Oklahoma Protestant Christian school expelled an eight-year-old for telling another student that she had a crush on her, a gay media outlet from the United Kingdom reported that it was a Catholic school. False. It was just assumed that if there was something that homosexual activists did not like, the culprit was probably Catholic. We forced them to correct the record.

It would help if Catholics in public office spoke up about these issues. But we don’t have much in the way of leadership.

As noted in this issue of Catalyst, almost all Catholic Democrats in the Congress are pro-abortion. President Biden, as everyone knows, is rabidly pro-abortion, and he, too, claims a Catholic status. Where does this leave Catholics? How can we depend on Catholics in the House, the Senate, and the White House to defend Catholics when they won’t defend the right to life?

I am happy to note that many bishops have spoken up. Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez, president of the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops, expressed his dismay with President Biden for his executive orders on abortion. Kansas City Archbishop Joseph Naumann and Cardinal Timothy Dolan of the New York Archdiocese have also been outspoken; many others have as well.

For their courage, these bishops were attacked by the National Catholic Reporter, a rogue media outlet that is about as Catholic as the Mafia. Regrettably, this publication is popular with dissident Catholic faculty on college campuses, and is a favorite among some staffers at the bishops’ conference. This is one more reason why otherwise good Catholics in the public eye are reluctant to speak out: they have been intimidated by delinquent members of the Catholic media.

The assault on free speech, duly cited in this issue, is at an all-time high. We are dealing with a phenomenon much more invidious than McCarthyism. To prove this point, consider that in 1996, Nicholas von Hoffman, a liberal columnist for the Washington Post, examined recently released archival information about the McCarthy era and, despite misgivings about the Wisconsin senator, concluded that he was “still closer to the truth [about Communist infiltration in Washington] than those who ridiculed him.”

We don’t need to be lectured today about blacklisting during the McCarthy era. That was child’s play when compared to the censorial powers of Apple, Amazon, Google and Twitter. These Big Tech companies, which are strongly tied to the Biden administration, have censored many of those who hold to traditional moral values, and that certainly includes Catholic organizations.

We at the Catholic League have no options. We either fight back or we close up shop. But if Covid didn’t kill us, nothing will.