Media

Archbishop Dolan’s Critics Freak Out

In November, following the election of Archbishop Timothy Dolan as the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, critics of the New York archbishop went ballistic. Here are a few examples:

NPR was worried that Archbishop Dolan is “overtly conservative,” and Tim Rutten of the Los Angeles Times fretted about his “confrontational approach.” Dissident Catholics were upset as well: New Ways Ministry said the vote “sends an ominous message”; Call to Action also saw his election as “ominous”; Sr. Maureen Fiedler said “we now have our very own Catholic version of the ‘Tea Party’ movement”; DignityUSA concluded that Dolan’s election meant the hierarchy is “out of step” with Catholics. Similarly, the Human Rights Campaign, a gay secular group, said the vote meant the hierarchy is “out of step.” Not to be outdone, the website of the Tucson Citizen accused Dolan of evincing an “arrogant” attitude in winning (it is true that he was caught smiling).

SNAP, the professional victims’ group, opined that Dolan’s “winning personality obscures his terrible track record on abuse.” Marian Ronan of Religion Dispatches said his election is “not a good sign,” and her colleague, Sarah Posner, concluded—and this really is ominous—that “the bishops are targeting families with loved ones who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.” The Internet site Lez Get Real called Dolan “the Vatican’s spin-doctor,” and the website of Time had a headline which read, “More Bad News for Obama 2012: Catholics Elect Dolan.” Edgeboston.com picked up the AP piece, but chose to give it a new headline: “Catholic Bishops’ Vote to Mean Harder Church Stance Against Gay Families.” And atheist Susan Jacoby sweated over the fact that Dolan will be treated by the media “as if he is the voice of all American Catholics.” She needs to get used to it.

It was tempting to conclude that some in the asylum had escaped. More likely, it meant these are not good times for those who have sought—in many cases their entire adult life—to turn the Catholic Church, and America more generally, upside down and inside out. They gave it their best shot, but they lost. Maybe it’s time they retired.

Media Bias

The duplicity on the part of the media and civil libertarians ran deep in 2010, giving further credence to the “double standard” the media holds for certain protected groups.

We noted that the story of a nun who was accused of embezzling $1.2 million from Iona College was much more popular than the story about a rabbinical court in Brooklyn giving orders to its members not to report crimes to the police. The story on the nun was carried on the front page of Google’s “New York” section, Yahoo!, the Associated Press, UPI, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Daily News, the New York Post, USA Today, Huffington Post, and dozens of other media outlets. The story on the rabbinical court was picked up by the New York Daily News and Gothamist.com.

Moreover, it is okay during election years for African-American ministers to endorse politicians in their churches, and it is okay to spend public funds for prayer rugs and foot baths for Muslims. The time has come to end the duplicity.

INTERNET

January 27
Sarah Posner, a writer for the website Religion Dispatches, was furious with the United States bishops for imploring Congress to move forward with health care legislation, but reiterating the call for protection of conscience rights and the unborn.

She spoke derisively of their commitment to “life-giving” health care; she argued that their real “motive” is to “normalize and expand their agenda on reproductive care”; she accused them of pursuing a “divide and conquer strategy”; she contended that they seek “to portray themselves as the heroes” after “they’ve absolved themselves of responsibility for holding the House bill hostage.”

February 19
Elton John told Parade magazine that Jesus was gay. “I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems.” We noted that Jesus was certainly compassionate, but to call Jesus a homosexual is to label Him a sexual deviant. But what else would we expect from a man who previously said, “From my point of view, I would ban religion completely.”

March 10
Writer Paula Kirby took shots at the Church in a piece for the Washington Post/Newsweek blog “On Faith.” Writing in response to the Archdiocese of Washington’s decision to cut benefits to future employees to avoid providing services to same-sex couples, Kirby wrote for the Catholic Church “nothing short of a theocracy will do.” She took an unwarranted shot speaking to the Church: “You want to influence public policy on sexuality and childcare? Fine. Get persuading. Though in the light of the endless stream of revelations about your own failings in these areas, I can only hope it’s a very long time indeed before anyone in a position of power repeats the mistake of looking to the Roman Catholic Church for guidance in matters of sexual morals and child welfare.”

March 22
Michael Wolff, a contributing editor for Vanity Fair, wrote a column bashing the Catholic Church on his own website Newser.com. Wolff began his column fairly stating: “In an age when all religions must be treated by right-thinking people with the greatest tolerance and respect, much of the reaction to the sexual abuse story in Europe and the Pope’s involvement with it, is, nevertheless, deeply and specifically anti-Catholic.” Wolff then proceeded into a bigoted rant: “There might not be a Church, as we know the Church, without sexual abuse. The Catholic Church equals sex abuse.”

April 19
In an interview with the British newspaper the Guardian, atheist author Philip Pullman was asked if he thought the sex abuse scandal would change the Catholic Church. Pullman responded: “I hope so…. In one way, I hope the wretched organisation will vanish entirely. So I’m looking on with a degree of dispassionate interest.”

April 26
On Beliefnet, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach wrote about his upcoming visit with Pope Benedict XVI. In his piece Boteach discussed the sex abuse scandal and certain rules that the Church should adopt to stop the problem. One such rule was: “No priest should be allowed to be in alone with a child. Period. If a priest needs to speak to a child alone, the door must never be locked and there must always be the possibility that they can be intruded upon by outsiders.” What Boteach never mentioned was that since the mid-1980s the abuse rates have dramatically declined and the Church has been very successful at curbing recent abuse.

May
A video titled “The Pope Song,” performed by British comedian Tim Minchin, debuted on YouTube. During the song animated figures of the pope, bishops, cardinals, priests and nuns dance and in a few instances, the pope and cardinals expose their genitals. The “F” word is used repeatedly throughout the song with one of the phrases being, “f*** the motherf***ing pope.” We wrote to YouTube asking how this video could pass its decency standards, but were left with the explanation that it was not in violation.

May 17
On the Huffington Post, Rev. Dr. Cindi Love wrote an article on the failure of the bishops to take care of the sex abuse scandal. In the article she said that it appears that Pope Benedict XVI was “an enabler himself” of sex abuse.

She then lectured the Church hierarchy: “Pedophiles go free while Catholic priests are put on trial for disagreeing with the Church’s position on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people and their relationships. Extremist radicals kill doctors who provide abortions, and the church’s objections is nary a whisper. Innocent children still line up in Catholic schools and churches where the vetting process for leaders is ill-defined and inconsistently applied. There is much work to do and most of it must start with the Pope.”

May 19
On the Washington Post/Newsweek blog “On Faith,” Susan Jacoby wrote a misleading piece on the Church’s opposition to legislation in several states that would extend the statute of limitations in sex abuse cases. She noted that the Church is opposed to such legislation solely because it would hurt the diocesan finances, when in fact such legislation unfairly singled out the Church, while safeguarding public institutions.

She also noted that the New York bishops opposed a bill that would extend the statute of limitations in the state. What she failed to note was that because this bill also covered the public schools, unions representing the public school establishment and other public institutions opposed it.

May 19
On the Huffington Post, Clay Farris Naff wrote that the Vatican’s handling of sex abuse cases did not match Pope Benedict XVI’s apologies to victims. In doing so, he made over-the-top generalizations that insulted the pope. Ironically, Pope Benedict is credited by serious observers as doing more to bring about needed reforms than anyone else.

May 22
On the Huffington Post, Michele Somerville wrote a piece on the sensuality of the Church, the sex abuse scandal and the Church’s treatment of homosexuals. The following are a few of her comments:

• At the fore of every Catholic church in the world, one beholds an image of Jesus spread open, nearly naked on a cross. Creamy angels and a God we eat. Could a religion be more carnal, more sensual?

• It is inevitable that the tension between Catholic sensuality and its hierarchy’s commitment to repression should give way to perversion.

• Because perpetuating the idea that any sex outside heterosexual marriage is a sin allows the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church to ensure that Catholics continue to feel morally unfit to discern. It keeps Catholic women powerless and fecund. It keeps the priesthood a precious, over-trusted caste comprised of lonely, sometimes arrested, and, too often, not quite fully human men.

• The hierarchy mercilessly punishes members of its Church for the transgression of being born gay.

• For all we know, Jesus of Nazareth was gay.

August 9
On the Huffington Post, Michelle Somerville asked whether or not parishioners should continue giving donations to their Church. Her reasoning was, “People whose opinions on Catholic things I most value have exhorted me to stop putting money in the basked at Mass, and I am starting to think they’re right.” By not donating, she writes, that she doesn’t have to worry that her money is  bankrolling the “consiglieri who get bosses off the hook when they’re charged with pimping out children” nor will it contribute to the “Vatican snitches who spy on women in convents.”

August 11
In an article on RHRealityCheck.com, Angela Bonavoglia discussed an apparent “gender apartheid” in the Church. She stated that: “If ever there were doubt about the relationship between the Catholic Church’s spectacular failure to address the clerical child sex abuse crisis and the church’s glaring system of gender apartheid, the Vatican put it to rest in July. Engendering a firestorm of criticism, their new canonical guidelines for handling and punishing the most ‘grave crimes’ in church law revealed just how enraged the hierarchy is at women who dare to challenge them.”

September 9
AOL news writer, Paul Wachter, compared Pope Benedict XVI to Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a pro-terrorist anti-Semite. These comments came after CNN fired Octavia Nasr for praising Fadlallah as “one of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot.” Wachter asked whether CNN should be consistent and fire anyone who praises Pope Benedict XVI since he “covered up the clerical rape of young boys and whose anti-contraception proselytization has contributed to the deaths of millions from AIDS.”

October 8
Movie critic Roger Ebert and John Nolte of Breitbart.com lampooned Salon.com film reviewer Andrew O’Hehir’s feverish take on “Secretariat,” a movie about the famed horse. O’Hehir called it a “honey-dipped fantasy vision of the American past,” and claimed that “it’s legitimate to wonder exactly what Christian-friendly and ‘middle-American’ inspirational values are being conveyed here.”

Most of the movie’s reviews don’t merit entry in the Annual Report, nonetheless, they revealed a phobia, at best, about religion. While O’Hehir’s review was the most apoplectic, others shared his view, among them were: the Sarasota Herald, the New York Times, and Newsday, all of which noted the apparent Christian overtones with distaste.

MAGAZINES

January 22
On the website of Esquire magazine, a column was published entitled, “Do Priests Masturbate?” The first line of the story read: “They do at my church—all over the place. Nuns, too. It’s fairly distracting. I’m thinking of lodging a complaint.” The article concluded by saying: “Some do confess their sins, but most seek comfort in the Holy Book, which advises a priest with unholy thoughts to ‘remain silent, but cleave nightly unto the spine of thine copy of Torso that thou keepest hidden in thine mattress ticking’ (Genesis 1:1).”

February
Actress Lindsay Lohan appeared on the cover of the Spring/Summer edition of the French fashion magazine Purple posing as Jesus with a crown of thorns on her head and her hands outstretched. Not only was the pose inappropriate, it hit the newsstands the week before Lent began.

March
Harper’s Bazaar featured a series of photos showing prominent designers being depicted in scenes from Pedro Almodovar’s films. One designer, Jean Paul Gaultier, was depicted as a nun and said, “I am the nun of the religion of fashion. Actually, a mother superior.” In the photo, as in the movie, the nun is sitting next to a scantily clad woman under a crucifix and a picture of Jesus.

May/June
The Philadelphia Trumpet ran a piece by Gerald Flurry that accused the Vatican of smuggling Nazis following World War II. Flurry also stated that Pope Pius XII “was by far the greatest Nazi smuggler” of the time and took a shot at Pope Benedict XVI for considering him for sainthood despite his “despicable history.”

May 19
On the AlterNet website, Harriet Fraad of Tikkun magazine wrote an article trying to figure out what was behind priestly sex abuse. She began by stating that the Church has had a “2,000 year history of sex abuse” and asked “why has the Church been plagued by so much pedophilia—predominantly homosexual?” The article then said the Church could “reasonably be taken to task for being an ideology that justifies the exploitation of women in the household.” The article also alleged that the “Catholic Church hierarchy (priests, bishops, cardinals and the Pope himself) has not yet been held accountable, publically [sic] and appropriately, for the crimes committed on their watch over several decades: crimes of molestation, rape, assault and yes, torture of children.”

June 7
Time ran a cover story on Pope Benedict XVI titled, “Why Being Pope Means Never Having to Say You’re Sorry: The Sex Abuse Scandal and the Limits of Atonement.” The piece was strewn with misinformation and falsehoods.

The writers, Jeff Israely and Howard Chua-Eoan began the article by speculating whether the pope would apologize for the behavior of abusive priests and that the pope couldn’t apologize for fear of damaging the magesterium and papal power. Yet the article quoted the pope apologizing for such priests. Citing the pope’s apology regarding wrongdoing by some Irish priests, Time posited that he didn’t apologize “for anything he or, indeed, the Holy See may have done, much less the mystical entity called the Church, the bride of Christ.” But the article never addressed why the pope would apologize for an offense that he never committed: it just assumed that he was guilty and, worse, refused to admit it.

The article also asked: “Why didn’t the church simply report to the civil authorities the crimes its priests were suspected of committing?” For the same reason every other institution—religious and secular—didn’t. They followed the zeitgeist of the day and put the accused in therapy and returned him to his post when it was completed.

July 20
Time ran a piece by Tim Padgett blasting the Church on the subject of women’s ordination. Padgett described the Church as “misogynous” and that it is represented by a bunch of “homophobes wearing miters.” Padgett went on to say that denying women the right to become priests was evidence of its “increasingly spiteful rhetoric of bigotry.”

August 19
Bloggers for Psychology Today were asked to come up with plot-lines for sitcoms they would enjoy. The exercise was no doubt intended to be fun, but one struck a chord with Catholics. “Altered Boys” was among the winner’s list. The teaser boasted “Just think of what Hogan’s Heroes did for Nazi POW camps. We transpose that fascist hilarity from the waning days of WWII to the Catholic Church with a light-hearted look at pedophile priests. Join our crew of wacky (but clever) altar boys as they outwit the lecherous men who are constantly devising ever more outlandish plots to introduce them to ‘the holy sacrament.’ Timely, provocative, controversial: This one can’t miss!”

September 20
Sinead O’Connor wrote an open letter to the pope about the sex abuse scandal. She claimed that he was dishonest when he said that the Church did not act “quickly nor decisively” when dealing with the alleged misconduct of some priests. She said, “in fact church authorities acted extremely quickly and decisively, but in protection of rapist priests and the church, not of children.” She concluded by saying, “As long as the house of The Holy Spirit remains a haven for criminals the reputation of the church will remain in ruins.”

November 15
People magazine featured a picture of Harrison Ford dressed as a nun for Halloween.

MOVIES

September
Lindsay Lohan posed as a nun licking the barrel of a gun on a poster for the movie “Machete.”

NEWSPAPERS

February 19
In the “Weekend Arts” section of the New York Times, there was an article about a satirical comedy group, Capitol Steps, that was playing in New York City. The piece described some of the skits, none of which apparently dealt with Catholicism. Nonetheless, in a color photo accompanying the article, there was a picture of a man grabbing the breast of a woman dressed as a nun in full habit (three men dressed in bizarre attire were also in the picture). The gratuitous picture had nothing to do with the show’s description.

On April 8, the Portland Press Herald ran an article noting the groups’ upcoming performance in Portland, Maine using the same picture to promote the group.

March 10-18
Boise Weekly featured a painting of Sarah Palin on the cover dressed and posing as the Blessed Virgin. The painting also depicted Palin with devil horns, a gun in one hand and wearing an upside-down cross around her neck.

March 14
On the front page of the “Week in Review” section of the New York Times, there was a piece on health care titled, “Is Failure Forgivable?” Accompanying the article was a photo of President Barack Obama with his finger pointed upwards. Superimposed in the background was an illustration that showed an illuminated cross; a halo over President Obama’s head was also depicted. A small picture of the White House was shown at the bottom of the cross.

March 17
Pope Benedict XVI was portrayed covering his ears, eyes and mouth in a cartoon by Taylor Jones that ran in the Westerly Sun.

March 17
The Jewish weekly The Forward ran an article by Raphael Mostel in which he claimed that Pope Pius IX “earned a place” in hell for the “kidnapping” of Edgar Mortara in 1858. Mostel did not reveal the fact that Mortara was baptized because the Catholic servant girl in the household thought he was dying and in need of salvation. He was subsequently taken from his family because the Church, at the time, judged that a baptized Christian could not be raised in a Jewish home. Moreover, Mostel failed to note that Mortara developed a father-son relationship with Pius IX and even became a priest.

March 25
The Akron Beacon Journal ran a cartoon by Mike Luckovich showing the pope trying to divert attention from the sex abuse scandal by announcing that he would play in the Masters Golf Tournament.

March 28
Clay Bennett of the Chattanooga Times Free Press had a cartoon showing people walking into Mass. The church’s sign reads, “All Clergy Undergo Thorough Background Checks.”

March 29
The Times Herald ran a cartoon by John Cole saying that the pope was as deaf as the victims of Father Murphy in Wisconsin when it came to listening to claims of priestly sex abuse.

March 30
The Washington Examiner ran a cartoon by Nate Beeler showing a priest with a lip mark on his collar. A woman says to him, “Father! That better be lipstick and not Juicy Juice on your collar!”

March 31
The Hartford Courant ran a cartoon by Bob Englehardt showing Christ being nailed to the Cross with a nail shaped like the pope.

April 1
After being charged with defending Father Marcial Maciel in numerous publications, Bill Donohue replied to all of those who accused him; Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, sexually abused seminarians and fathered a child. In 1997, Donohue wrote a letter in the Hartford Courant taking issue with the newspaper giving credibility to some of Maciel’s accusers who said that he told them that he had papal permission to have sex with them. Other than Tim Rutten of the Los Angeles Times, who acknowledged Donohue’s statement, we heard nothing.

April 2
Mike Peters drew a cartoon that ran in the Foster’s Daily Democrat with the pope saying, “Here’s my church and here’s my steeple. If you’ve been abused…Just call my P.R. people.”

April 2
Paul Berge of the Philadelphia Gay News ran a cartoon showing the pope reading a paper with the headline referring to the sex abuse scandal. Behind him a cardinal is saying, “Let’s look at the bright side: we’re still allowed within 2,000 yards of schools, parks and playgrounds, aren’t we?”

April 4
Bill Schorr ran a cartoon in the Maine Sunday Telegram depicting a priest and a boy on opposite sides of the confessional. The priest says to the boy, “Forgive me, child…For I have sinned.”

April 5
Adam Zyglis ran a cartoon in the Buffalo News of the pope playing a shell game asking “Can you find the abuse?”

April 6
The Green Bay Press-Gazette ran a cartoon by Joe Heller showing Pope Benedict XVI plugging his ears while holding letters regarding the Father Murphy scandal and other pleas to remove abusive priests.

April 9
Cagle Cartoons ran a cartoon by Bill Schorr showing Hansel and Gretel arriving at a house made of candy with a smiling priest waiting at the front door.

April 11
The San Francisco Chronicle ran a cartoon where a father tells a priest that priests should be allowed to marry so that they could understand parents’ anger with the sex abuse scandal.

April 13
The Commercial Appeal ran a cartoon by Bill Day which showed the pope hiding people under his cassock with the word “Coverup” stamped on it.

April 13
The Times Union ran a cartoon by John DeRosier showing the Vatican throwing a nun off a ship to a whale labeled, “Child Sex Abuse Scandal.” The priest representing the Vatican says, “It’s for the good of the Church sister…”

April 14
Mike Thompson of the Detroit Free Press ran a cartoon that implied that the Church blamed its critics and the media for the sex abuse scandal.

April 14
Jeff Darcy of the Cleveland Plain Dealer had a cartoon showing the pope reading a book entitled The Coverup Bible by Richard Nixon.

April 20
Eugene Robinson, an editorial page writer for the Washington Post, wrote that “practically every day, there are new revelations of pedophile priests having been transferred to other parishes rather than being defrocked and reported to authorities.”
It would have been more accurate to say that every day there are old revelations of molesting priests, most of whom were homosexuals.

April 23
The New York Times ran a story about a case of alleged sexual abuse committed by a Chilean priest; the priest had sex with a 17-year old male and continued to have sex with him for 20 years even after he was married with children.

We asked, “Why would the New York Times try to sell this so-called abuse story with a straight face?” We came up with two reasons: it wallows in stories designed to weaken the moral authority of the Catholic Church, and it is so gay-friendly as to be gay-crazy.  The real news story here was not another case of homosexual molestation, it was the political motivation of the New York Times.

April 25
Clark Hoyt, the public editor of the New York Times, ran a piece that sought to defend the paper against Catholics unhappy with its coverage of the pope. In particular, he defended Laurie Goodstein’s story on Father Lawrence Murphy in which Goodstein reported that Murphy had molested dozens of deaf boys and left implications that Cardinal Ratzinger—now the pope—knew of the case.

Hoyt wrote, “In 1996, more than 20 years after Murphy moved away, the archbishop of Milwaukee, Rembert Weakland, wrote to Ratzinger [now the pope], saying he had just learned that the priest had solicited sex in the confessional while at the school, a particularly grievous offense, and asked how he should proceed.” (Our italics.) Weakland became Milwaukee archbishop in 1977.

Cardinal William Levada criticized Goodstein for trying to attribute blame to the pope for the Murphy case, “instead of to diocesan decisions at the time.” Moreover, we cited Weakland’s record: he not only sought to punish whistle-blowers─he ripped off the archdiocese to settle a sexual assault lawsuit brought by his 53-year old male lover. We added that because Weakland was a champion of liberal causes, the media gave him a pass for his delinquency in not contacting the Vatican about Murphy for two decades.

In a letter from the Coadjutor Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin, Raphael M. Fliss, to the Vicar for Personnel of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Father Joseph A. Janicki, he said, “In a recent conversation with Archbishop Weakland, I was left with the impression that it would not be advisable at this time to invite Father Murphy to return to Milwaukee to work among the deaf.” The letter was dated July 9, 1980. The source: the “Document Trail” that accompanied Goodstein’s article online.

April 27
In a New York Times op-ed, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig said the Church failed to protect children “for hundreds of years,” yet offered no evidence to support his claim. Most of the abuse, which involved post-pubescent males, occurred between the mid-60s and the mid-80s. Lessig falsely claimed that the problem is “worsening” because the Church is allegedly taking a leading role preventing victims from compensation: all the data show that in recent years the Church has done a better job addressing this problem than any other institution. Lessig also said that the Church is standing in the way of repealing sovereign immunity, when in fact it is the public school establishment—not the Church—that benefits from, and resists changes to, this discriminatory state doctrine. He even hailed New York Assemblywoman Margaret Markey, the one who sought to insulate the public schools from being treated the same way in law that private schools are with regards to the statute of limitations. In other words, Lessig sided with those who want to keep sovereign immunity.

April 27
The New York Times ran a story regarding a case of sexual abuse that broke in 1995. The story involved a case of alleged sexual abuse by Cardinal Hans Hermann Groër of Vienna. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who was not formally in charge of these cases at that time, nonetheless pressed for an investigation. At first, he was turned down, but soon thereafter Pope John Paul II approved an investigation.

Because that was most of what there was to this story, it just underscored our accusation that the point is to cast doubt on the pope’s commitment to ending abuse.

The article said that Cardinal Groër was suspected of “abusing minors and young men.” As has been true in most cases, the abuse did not involve pedophilia, but homosexuality. Also, the story mentioned how a Father Udo Fischer was molested by Groër “in the early 1970s.” Since Fischer was born in 1952, that meant the Timesunwittingly found yet another homosexual “victim.”

April 30
The New York Times ran an article by Rachel Donadio and demonstrated its tendency to allow editorial commentary to creep into its hard news stories. Donadio wondered whether the Vatican “will confront the failures in church leadership that allowed sexual abuse to go unpunished.” She added that “the culture of the church was for decades skewed against public disclosure and cooperation with the civil authorities,” and that only now are the bishops required to report abuse to the authorities. She consistently referred to the problem as pedophilia.

On April 10, the Times quoted Leslie Lothstein, a psychologist who has treated about 300 priests. He said that “only a small minority were true pedophiles.” The data show that most have been homosexuals.

Although most abusers went unpunished it was wrong to imply some sinister motive like “secrecy.” For example, the Murphy report on abuse in Dublin found that most bishops followed the advice of therapists—not canon law. Had Church law been followed things may have been different.

There is no law in most places mandating the reporting of any crime, and that is why fingering the Church smacked of bigotry.

May 6
The New York Times ran a front-page story on William Cardinal Levada, former archbishop of San Francisco and current head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that was just a rehash of old stories. The headline read, “Cardinal Has a Mixed Record on Abuse Cases.”

Front-page stories typically deal with current events, exceptions being new revelations about important historical events. But neither was the case with Levada. To learn that a leader has a “mixed record” extending back a quarter century is not exactly news. That’s why it read like an agenda.

The story behind this article was that when Levada was an archbishop, he learned that some homosexual priests molested post-pubescent males. Although the Times did not use the term homosexual, it was obvious from the story that the victims were not children. Then Levada did what nearly all leaders did at the time—and many still do—he sent the abuser to therapy. As usual, it didn’t work.

May 16
The New York Times ran an editorial that said, “The Catholic Church is working against the interests of child abuse victims in state legislatures around the country,” citing as proof its attempt to block laws in states that would amend the statute of limitations for alleged victims of sexual abuse. It urged New York lawmakers to pass a bill on this issue, noting opposition from the New York State Catholic Conference and Orthodox Jews.

What the Church was doing was protecting itself from campaigns to settle old scores by financially depleting the Church.

In 2009, there were two bills introduced in New York State on this issue: one applied only to private institutions; the other applied to both the private and the public sectors. The Times endorsed the former, thus showing its preference for (some) discriminatory legislation.

The Times’ editorial failed to note that in addition to Catholics and Orthodox Jews, those opposed to the New York bill included the New York State School Boards Association, the New York Council of School Superintendents, the New York Association of Counties, the New York Conference of Mayors, the New York Farm Bureau, the New York Medical Society and the New York Society of Professional Engineers.

May 17
The New York Times ran a front-page article on New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan trying to pin some dirt on him, but failed to do so.

Times reporter Serge F. Kovaleski had been investigating Archbishop Dolan for a year, but failed to lay a glove on him. But it wasn’t for lack of trying: unprofessionally, he allowed a professional victims’ group, SNAP, to drive his 3784-word story.

We contended that no other newspaper in the nation would post a front-page story on a religious leader that led nowhere. The paper reported that the professional victims were disappointed when they learned that Dolan, then the newly installed archbishop of Milwaukee, “had instructed lawyers to seek the dismissal of five lawsuits against the church.” The only question that mattered was whether Dolan made the right decision but the story never addressed this issue again.

Much coverage was given to a priest who sued his accuser. Interestingly, the accuser had a psychiatric history of lying and blaming others, and no one ever spoke badly about the priest. Largely unresolved, one wonders why this case was even mentioned, unless it was to put Dolan in a bad light for standing by the priest.

The story made a big deal about the fact that not all dioceses post the names of guilty priests, and that many do not list religious order priests. Why should the Church be held to a different standard than the public school administrators that don’t post the names of guilty teachers?

May 27
New York Times op-ed columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote a piece praising individual Catholics, but condemning the institutional Church as “patriarchal,” “premodern,” “out of touch” and “self-absorbed.” Discussing the situation regarding a nun who helped facilitate an abortion at a Catholic hospital and her subsequent excommunication, Kristof called the nun “saintly” and that she “helped save a woman’s life.”

June 29
On the Falls Church News-Press’ website, Wayne Besen wrote a scathing piece about the raid of Church offices in Belgium by the police; the name of the article was “Raiding the Child Rapists in Belgium.” Along with calling the Holy See “clueless on the gravity of the [sex abuse] situation” and “clumsy” in how it treats victims, Besen claimed that the Church has less credibility than the North American Man Boy Love Association. He also said that “no country that cares about its children should allow the Vatican authority to police itself” and to “follow Belgium’s laudable lead.”

July 10
The Boston Globe ran a cartoon by Dan Wasserman showing a bishop and a rabbi reading a newspaper headlined with a rabbi arrested for abuse. The bishop says to the rabbi to learn from the Church’s experience and “don’t ordain women.” This is another example of the media misrepresenting the Vatican statement on the ordination of women and sex abuse.

July 17
The New York Times ran an editorial titled “Tone-Deaf in Rome,” falsely stating that the Church equated the ordination of women to the sexual abuse of children. It said, “Red herrings about female priests only display the tone-deafness of the Vatican’s dominant male hierarchy.”

We stated that it is acceptable to take issue with any religion’s positions on public policy, but the house rules should always be respected (save for the few examples where innocent life may be threatened). We said that the Times was simply using a secular yardstick to measure the doctrinal prerogatives of the Catholic Church.

July 18
Cartoonist Tony Auth of the Philadelphia Inquirer depicted a bishop protecting himself with a Cross from a woman holding a sign that promoted the ordination of women.

July 18
The Austin Statesman ran a large colorful picture of a pregnant nun exiting an outhouse on the front page of its “Life & Arts” section. We wrote to the paper asking why they chose to do so. Kathy Blackwell, the paper’s executive features editor, stated that it kept in the theme of “A Summer As Weird As Austin.” We asked then for her to send us photos that they have published of a pregnant Muslim woman wearing a niqab exiting a public toilet. We received no response.

July 18
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times wrote a piece in boilerplate fashion on the Church’s stricture against female ordination. In her column she indicted the pope with covering up sex abuse cases as cardinal, but had no evidence to prove it. She also took issue with the Church’s investigation into the orders of American nuns. What she left out was the fact that the Vatican was responding to the complaints it received from serious nuns about the dissidents in their orders.

July 21
The Denver Post ran a cartoon that suggested the Church was more worried about the ordination of women than it is protecting children from abusers.

July 30
Eileen DiFranco, a member of Roman Catholic Womenpriests, wrote in thePhiladelphia Inquirer that the Vatican’s announcement of norms regarding the ordination of women “should be seen in the context of the church’s pervasive and persistent clerical misogyny throughout its history.” She falsely claimed that the Vatican placed female ordination on the same level as priestly sexual abuse, when in fact Church officials declared that they were grave offenses on different levels. DiFranco ended by stating that the “historical Roman Catholic misogyny spawn harmful consequences in the world. The women they relegate to second-class citizenship comprise two-thirds of the world’s poor and most of the world’s victims.”

August 4
Judge Sheila O’Brien, a Justice of the Illinois Appellate Court in Chicago, wrote an op-ed piece in the Chicago Tribune requesting that the Church excommunicate her. Judge O’Brien said that she loved Mass, Catholic social teaching, nuns who built churches, and dedicated priests for their many talents and good will. But she questioned “How can we stay in a church whose leaders protect pedophiles? Yet, how can we leave and relinquish our church to those very leaders?” She begged for excommunication because “it would free [her] conscience of all of this.” We said Judge O’Brien should recuse herself any time a priest or nun appears before her court because she clearly harbors an animus towards the clergy.

August 10
Martin Sutovec of the LaCrosse Tribune ran a cartoon entitled “White Collar Crime.” It depicts a drooling priest encroaching on a boy in underwear.

September 9
The Orlando Sentinel posted a picture on the front page of their website depicting a man, woman, and their dog—the man was dressed as Joseph, the woman as Mary, and the dog as Baby Jesus.

September 21
The Delaware County Daily Times wrote an article which called upon the Vatican to stop “demonizing” women. It read “Vatican officials should spend less time demonizing women and more time ensuring the prosecution of pedophiles. They are a danger to children of all faiths.”

September 25
Colin McNickle, an editor for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, wrote an article about the “financial scandal” the Vatican is facing and said “this new financial scandal—if proven—will beg the question of whether the Catholic Church is a corrupt criminal enterprise.”

October 10
Editors at the Washington Post decided not to run a cartoon that mentioned, but did not depict, Muhammad. The cartoon showed children playing in a park surrounded by zoo animals, roller-skaters, and hot-dog stands and sported a phrase at the bottom which asked, “Where’s Muhammad?”  The Posts’s style editor, Ned Martel, said their reason for not printing the “Non Sequitur” cartoon by Wiley Miller was that “it seemed a deliberate provocation without a clear message.” We include this entry because it highlights the incredible duplicity on the part of the newspaper: it had recently run an anti-Catholic cartoon.

October 15
The New York Times wrote “gushing” reviews about an art exhibit by ACT UP. The exhibit features a picture of the late John Cardinal O’Connor resembling a condom (pictured next to him), with the inscription, “Know Your Scumbag.”

November 5
The New York Times featured a review of a Danh Vo art exhibit. One element of the exhibit, which the Times featured in its article, was a picture of five priests—two of whom are holding hands. The picture itself was not objectionable, rather it was the intended implication found in the caption below the photograph which read: “A 19th-century photograph of Roman Catholic Priests in Danh Vo’s ‘Autoerotic Asphyxiation,’ at Artists Space.”

All we learned about the priests is that they were about to leave France for missionary work in Asia, one of whom was canonized as a saint in 1988. Bill Donohue asked, “How does this relate to autoerotic asphyxiation?”

November 25
A cartoon by Mike Luckovich appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It featured the pope and a condom with a caption that read “…and they make awesome water balloons…”

December 5
The New York Times ran a piece called “Immaculate Perception,” an article about the  “inevitable demise” of the Virgin Mary. It was a snarky piece suggesting that “Mary has undergone [shape-shifting] over the past two millennia methodically dismantled the legend, which had served as an instrument of oppression, stunting women’s growth and curtailing their lives.”

TELEVISION

January 3
Fox News analyst Brit Hume made a plea to Tiger Woods to turn to Christianity in order to seek forgiveness. For doing so, Hume caused a firestorm and was compared to Islamic extremists by Keith Olbermann of MSNBC.

January 13
Comedians Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong appeared on CBS News’ “Washington Unplugged” lobbying for the legalization of marijuana. During the discussion, Marin stated, “Statistically, people, kids have more to fear from priests than they do from marijuana.”

February 4
Sarah Silverman appeared on “The View”; during the show they played a portion of her obscene rant (the most vile comments were omitted) against Pope Benedict XVI that she made in October 2009 on Bill Maher’s show. Silverman got a pass when she first aired her foul-mouthed attack on the pope and had it repeated on “The View.” The most indefensible thing Silverman said on Maher’s show—that if the pope sold the Vatican, he “will get crazy p***y. All the p***y”—was left out.

Silverman was nothing if not defensive about her anti-Catholic remarks being made by a Jew. She said that this “has nothing to do with me being Jewish. You know, a lot of mail was like ‘What if it was Jewish?’ You know, yeah. If the Jews owned something like that I would be, I’d have no religion. I’m not talking as a Jew. I just can’t help that I’m a Jew—it comes out of my pores.”

Later that night, Silverman appeared on Joy Behar’s CNN Headline News show where the host questioned her about the rant. Instead of apologizing, Silverman reiterated what she said in the Maher video that if the pope sold the Vatican, “any involvement in the Holocaust” would be discounted. The fact that the pope’s “involvement” in the Holocaust was limited to his conscription into the Hitler Youth, along with every other young German boy at the time, and that he escaped at the first chance, was never mentioned by Silverman.

February 5
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar claimed that Catholics beat themselves when they commit a sin. She said, “[Catholics] beat themselves like this, mea culpa, mea culpa.”

February 9
On CNN Headline News’ “Joy Behar Show,” homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile said, “You have this pope saying that homosexuality is the end of civilization. That we have to protect the culture from homosexuality the way we have to protect the rainforest from degradation. You know, we’ve got a bishop in Guam who just said that gays are worse than the Islamic fundamentalists.” To which Behar said, “Oh, my God.”

None of what Signorile said was true. Not only had the pope never said that homosexuality is the “end of civilization,” a Lexis-Nexis search revealed that he has never even used that term.

Regarding the comment on homosexuality and the rainforest, here is exactly what the pope said in December 2008: “That which has come to be expressed and understood with the term ‘gender’ effectively results in man’s self-emancipation from Creation (nature) and from the Creator. Man wants to do everything by himself and to decide always and exclusively about anything that concerns him personally. But this is to live against truth, to live against the Spirit Creator. The tropical rainforests deserve our protection, yes, but man does not deserve it less as a Creature of the Spirit himself, in whom is inscribed a message that does not mean a contradiction of human freedom but its condition.” Nowhere is homosexuality mentioned, never mind the spin Signorile put on it.

In October 2009, Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron said that “Islamic fundamentalists clearly understand the damage that homosexual behavior inflicts on a culture. That is why they repress such behavior by death.” But he did not sanction such measures. Indeed, he unequivocally condemned them. “Terrorism as a way to oppose the degeneration of the culture is to be rejected completely since such violence is itself another form of degeneracy.” So Signorile twisted what was actually said. We called for a retraction but none was made.

February 17
On Ash Wednesday, Fox News analyst Bob Beckel criticized Vice President Joe Biden for wearing ashes on TV. In the middle of discussing President Obama’s stimulus plan, Beckel gratuitously said, “Sorry about laughing, but I looked at Joe Biden’s forehead and I know it’s Ash Wednesday, but I’m not sure I would wear that ash on the air.”

February 17
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar hosted several teenage mothers and asked them if they ever considered having an abortion during their pregnancy. When the teens said no, Behar asked, “Are you Catholic girls? Religious girls? That would be the reason I guess.” The teens also responded “no” to this question.

February 26
In a discussion on the “Joy Behar Show” regarding a church in a nudist colony, Behar said, “You know it’s a nice idea but where do they hang the rosary beads?”

March 4
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar discussed that being raised Catholic she had never seen a Bible: “I was raised Catholic, we had a missal. I never saw a Bible until I was in a hotel. It’s true.”

March 5
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and her guest, Margaret Carlson, discussed the health care bill and the reaction to it by nuns. Carlson claimed that Catholic bishops are too busy denying communion to pro-choice politicians. Behar replied, “The nuns would not be backing it if abortion was going to be funded.” Carlson added, “They’re the real conscience of the Catholic Church.” Behar agreed.

March 15
On ABC’s “The View,” the panelists criticized the decision of a Colorado Catholic school not to enroll students of a lesbian couple. Both Joy Behar and Elisabeth Hasselbeck claimed that Jesus would not have approved of the Catholic school’s decision. During her rant, Behar said, “We’ll be hearing from Bill Donohue tomorrow probably.” With the show’s record of Catholic-bashing, we had no choice but to comment.

March 31
On Comedy Central’s “South Park,” character Eric Cartman made three separate comments bashing the pope and implicating guilt in the case of Father Lawrence Murphy, the molester priest from Wisconsin. In answering a rhetorical question Cartman says: “Does the pope help pedophiles get away with their crimes? Is the pope Catholic and making the world safe for pedophiles? Does the pope crap on the broken lives and dreams of 200 deaf boys?” The episode re-aired on August 24.

April 2
Ovation TV aired the anti-Catholic production “The Last Temptation of Christ” on Good Friday. We wrote to CEO Charles Segars asking for an explanation why the station chose one of the holiest days on the Catholic calendar to air that particular production. We also asked if he had any plans to offend any other religions on their holy days. We did not receive a response.

April 3
On the “Wanda Sykes Show,” Sykes bashed the Catholic League for its ad defending Pope Benedict XVI in the New York Times. In her rant, she claimed that it would make sense for priests to be homosexual because they “get to hang out with other men. Wear a dress. Drink wine. They got candles and incense. Big old pretty jewelry.” She then said that the “only difference between the Catholic Church paying off its victims and Tiger Woods paying off his mistresses is the Catholic Church can write it off as tax-deductible.” She also said that the Church is “hiding [its] bad priests like Easter eggs.” The show re-aired on August 14.

April 5
On Easter Monday, the panel on ABC’s “The View” discussed the Church’s sex abuse scandal and the role that Pope Benedict XVI played in dealing with them; the panel was comprised of Barbara Walters, Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, Sherri Shepherd and Elisabeth Hasselbeck. During the discussion, Walters noted, “It’s brought up a lot of things that are unrelated and should not have been brought up. It brings up the whole case of homosexuality. There is not a connection between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. That is something that is talked about.”

During the discussion, Walters noted that Hasselbeck is Catholic, to which Hasselbeck quickly replied, “I was raised Catholic.” Goldberg then said, “I’m Catholic. I just don’t show it.” Hasselbeck later took a shot at the pope, essentially calling for him to be removed from his position: “What’s with the infallibility? At this point, in this economy, no one is immune from being fired. Someone who has been in charge of a system that is so faulty, so harmful, so hurtful, should not be in a position where you cannot take any blame. You should be in a responsible position.”

At the end of the discussion, Goldberg said, “You know, we often get accused of slamming the Church. We’re not slamming the Church. We’re slamming one practice of this horrifying priest that no one, no one saw fit to protect kids from.” Behar responded to this statement by saying, “Some of the bishops and people in Rome are slamming the New York Times for reporting it. It’s like let’s kill the messenger. That is really outrageous.”

We found it particularly offensive that they held this discussion the day after Easter.

April 5
During the monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno joked about the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal: “And Easter’s a little different this year at the Vatican, instead of hiding eggs, the Vatican just relocated them to a different lawn.”

April 6
During his monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno made a few jokes regarding the Catholic Church’s sex abuse scandal: “And yesterday was the big White House Easter Egg roll. Of course, Catholic priests, they didn’t have time to hide their eggs, they were too busy hiding each other…. As you know, the Roman Catholic Church continues to be rocked by the sex abuse crisis. In fact, they’re now thinking of changing their name to the Roman Polanski Catholic Church.”

April 14
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and author Paula Froelich were discussing the Vatican forgiving the Beatles for claiming to be bigger than Jesus. During the discussion, Froelich said, “Oh stop it’s marketing 101. Look over there shiny object; don’t look at me while I have my hands down some young boy’s pants.”

April 19
While discussing Pope Benedict XVI and the Church on the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar asked comedian Lewis Black, “Do you feel sorry for him at all? I mean he went from Hitler Youth to covering up for molesters, do you feel sorry for him?”

April 21
In his opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno was discussing the ash cloud that was enveloping Europe: “Give you an idea how bad the volcano was, it was spewing out so much ash the Catholic Church now said they couldn’t see what it was doing wrong.”

April 28
During the monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno was looking at different places through Google Street View, among the places was the Vatican: “All right, let’s go overseas again, let’s go somewhere in Europe. Go to Europe. Let’s do it. Oh, Vatican. Oh, there’s Vatican City. Can we go—show the front of it there. Look at—oh, kids stay free. Wow. Let’s get out of there.”

May 5
Comedy Central announced that an animated show, “J.C.” was being considered for its lineup. It was announced that the show was about Jesus Christ seeking to live out a normal life in New York, outside the reach of His “powerful but apathetic father.” What made this particularly offensive was that the same executives who were pitching “J.C.” were the same ones that censored a depiction of Muhammad on “South Park.” A network official, said about “J.C.”: “In general, comedy in its purest form always makes some people uncomfortable.” We noted this was completely untrue considering that Comedy Central has no interest in making Muslims feel uncomfortable.

We were happy to join a coalition of like-minded groups protesting this show. The group, headed by Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center, included: Michael Medved, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, Family Research Council and the Family Television Council.

May 10
During the opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno took another shot at the Church for the abuse scandal: “According to a New York Times poll, 54 percent of people feel that the Vatican is out of touch with Catholics. The other 46 are young Catholics who feel they’re way too much in touch. Way too much in touch.”

May 14
On NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno went back to the well and made a joke indicting all Catholic priests of being molesters: “I actually saw a Catholic priest today calling for a boycott…. Well, maybe he was just calling for a boy on a cot. I think that was it.”

June 1
During the “Hot Topics” segment of ABC’s “The View,” the panel discussed Queen Elizabeth asking for more money from English taxpayers. Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar took the opportunity to take gratuitous shots at the Church:

Behar: By the way, I think you read the piece Queen Elizabeth is asking for more money from the taxpayers in England because she can’t afford the up keep of all those castles. Sell one, sell one. She gets about 8.5 million I think, she wants 11 million.

Goldberg: Well I say the same thing about the Catholic Church. There’s a lot of folks saying we don’t have money, we’re closing schools. I’m sorry. You’ve got some dough. Let’s take a big look at stuff. You know you can’t say to the pope, “Listen you need to sell some of this stuff.”

Behar: He needs to sell some of his dresses.

Goldberg: You can’t wear it all at the same time. You got to sell one thing, one thing or two things….

June 10
While discussing Lady Gaga’s video “Alejandro” on ABC’s “The View,” Elisabeth Hasselbeck commented that the pop star might be “making a statement about how she feels that nuns are restricted in some way.” She continued, “I mean, the Catholic Church in some ways is the only thing that hasn’t reached the women’s lib movement, you know? Nothing’s been able to get in there.”

June 16
During an episode of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with John Stewart,” comedian Louis C.K. concluded his interview by noting that there were certain words he could not say on his FX show, “Louie.” After offering a few examples of the forbidden words, he said, “I was going to say that the pope f**** boys….” [The obscenity was bleeped out.]

June 28
On ABC’s “The View,” Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg commented on a Gestapo-like raid of Church offices performed by Belgian police. Behar said, “If you’re [the Church] not going to be forthcoming with the info, then the cops are going to come in and get it.” Goldberg feebly attempted to defend the Church—saying that it was making strides in dealing with sex abuse claims—but undercut her own argument by stating that the Church “can’t be surprised that they’re [the police] going to come in” if they were stonewalled.

July 7
In the opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno said, “Oh, and a Catholic priest in Connecticut has been charged with stealing $1.3 million in church money and using the money for male escorts. Of course, his parish is very upset about this—except the altar boys. They’re going, huh, dodged a bullet on that one. Yeah, he spent $1.3 million on male escorts and, of course, the other priests were very confused. They said: ‘Why buy the escort when the altar boys are free?’”

July 16
During his opening monologue on NBC’s “Tonight Show,” Jay Leno took another shot at Catholic priests: “It was so hot I saw a priest stop at a kids’ lemonade stand—just got lemonade.” His shot at priests was the fifth and last in a string of jokes related to the hot weather, and it was the only one the audience shrugged off with “oohs.”

July 20
WBOC-TV in Delaware ran a poll on its website asking, “Do you agree with the Vatican’s position that ordaining women as priests is as grave an offense as pedophilia?” This question was flawed because the Church never equated the offenses.

August 16
Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” featured a segment with Stewart discussing the Ground Zero mosque controversy with show correspondant John Oliver. During the segment, Oliver brought up the Church’s sex abuse scandal in referencing locations for churches: “There’s a difference between what you can do and what you should do. For instance you can build a Catholic Church next to a playground. Should you? Should you do that Jon? Should you?”

August 16
On NBC’s “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon,” Fallon made a joke in his monologue regarding clergy sex abuse: “A priest in Italy has developed a new app that will let priests say mass on their ipads. Yeah. Yeah, altar boys are quickly learning the difference between itouch and bad touch.”

August 19
Comedy Central re-aired an episode of “South Park” that originally had aired in 2002. The show satirized the sex scandal by portraying priests eager to have sex with boys, and a bishop complaining in front of the pope that “we’ll never be able to have sex with boys again.” Catholics were revealed to really worship a “Queen Spider” and were lectured that the Church got out of hand because it deviated from the Scriptures, which are only ethical platitudes.

August 21
At a benefit for those effected by the Gulf Coast oil spill, Jay Leno delivered jokes about a “promiscuous priest in just the first 15 minutes of his hour-long show,” according to the Biloxi Sun Herald.

August 31
On the FX series, “Louie,” comedian Louis C.K.’s character was portrayed as a boy who was forced by a nun into feeling guilty about his sins. In the show, the Crucifixion was trivialized, a doctor traumatized children with an in-depth explanation of Christ’s Passion and Christianity was portrayed as a crock. At the end, Jesus was described by Louie’s mother as simply a “really, really nice guy who lived a long time ago and told everyone to love each other.”

September 7
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest Denis Leary were discussing the controversy surrounding the proposed building of a mosque near Ground Zero and a Florida pastor’s pledge to burn the Koran. When Leary stated that he was raised Catholic but that he is “lapse Catholic now,” Behar chimed in, “We all are.” Leary proceeded, “I hate organized religion.”

When discussing the mosque, Leary noted that the Archdiocese of New York tried to intervene to help facilitate a resolution in the controversy, but Behar stated that “they should really stay out.” Leary followed up by saying, “But when the Catholic Church is coming to help you decide on something, you know you’re in trouble. I don’t care what side of the argument you are on. Get the hell away. The Catholic Church is coming in and they’re actually trying to make sense out of it. You’re in trouble, you know.” Behar finished with, “I mean really, with their track record, the past few years, forget about it.”

September 15
In the monologue of the TBS show “Lopez Tonight,” host George Lopez discussed the pope’s car: “This car seats six adults comfortably and four boys very uncomfortably. It is the first time you hear a kid say, ‘I hope we’re not there yet.’”

September 21
On “Lopez Tonight,” host George Lopez made reference to a story about an investigation of the Vatican Bank, and then said, “Regarding the scandal, a Vatican spokesperson says as long as it doesn’t have to do with little boys, we confess.”

September 23
Matt Damon guest starred on the season premiere “30 Rock” as a romantic interest for Tina Fey’s character. In a scene where they are trying to get to know each other better they reveal a secret about themselves, Damon’s character’s secret was, “I was touched by a priest—it’s fine.”

September 25
CNN aired a documentary called “What the Pope Knew” that intended to lay blame on Pope Benedict XVI for the sex abuse scandal. The program alluded the pope was guilty of obstructing justice, and more concerned with stamping out dissent than stamping out sexual abuse. See page 44 for Bill Donohue’s response.

September 28
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest, Bill Maher, made sweeping comments about religion and Catholics. While Maher called faith a “suspension of critical thinking,” Behar claimed that religious people are “uninformed.” Among their assaults on the Church were claims that the Bible contained a lot of “wickedness” and was full of “just plain silliness.” Maher went further saying that the Ten Commandments were the “ultimate list of top ten things right from God” but they didn’t include “rape, incest, or genocide.”

October 4
On the “Daily Show with Jon Stewart,” atheist author Sam Harris said, “The Catholic Church is more concerned about preventing contraception than protecting child rape. It’s more concerned about preventing gay marriage than genocide.”

October 5
On the Fox program “Glee,” one of the characters saw an image of Jesus in his grilled cheese sandwich, calling it “Grilled Cheesus.” Throughout the episode religion, but Catholicism in particular, was referred to as a “fantasy” and that “God is kind of like Santa Claus for adults. Otherwise, God’s kind of a jerk, isn’t he?”

October 12
On Fox’s “Glee,” the character Rachel dressed in a provocative nun’s outfit while Finn dressed as a priest. Together, in costume, they sang a song to each other called “With You I’m Born Again.” One reviewer called it an “emotional episode about religion” while another noted the characters were “wearing super inappropriate costume [sets].”

October 12
On the “Joy Behar Show,” Behar and guest Dan Savage made comments suggesting all priests are homosexuals. Savage, a homosexual, said “I thought about becoming a priest because I thought I would never be able to come out to my family.” Behar and Savage laughed when she said, “What, are you kidding? That would have been a perfect place for you.” Savage responded by saying, “Yes I wanted a big house and I wanted to wear dresses and have sex with men.”

October 14
On ABC’s, “The View,” Bill O’Reilly said that 70 percent of Americans are opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque. When he was pressed to explain he said, “Because Muslims killed us on 9/11.” Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg became upset and walked off stage. Barbara Walters apologized for her co-hosts’ behavior and responded to O’Reilly by saying it was wrong to demean a whole religion because of the acts of some individuals.

While we agreed with Walters we asked why it was okay for Behar and Goldberg to paint all priests as molesters, but they were “outraged” when an unqualified remark was made about Muslims?

October 19
On the MSNBC show “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell,” O’Donnell criticized some of the Republican candidates in the election season, citing them for making what he called “stupid comparisons” between being gay and being an alcoholic or obese. Guest Bill Maher agreed, but added a quip about homosexual priests, painting them all as molesters. Maher said, “We really can’t resist [talking about gays in the Catholic Church] if it’s all around us.” He continued, “You know, that’s how the Catholic Church talks about it. You know, ‘our priests are not sinning, they’re just giving into temptation when they’re molesting children and going gay and stuff like that.’”

October 27
On his MSNBC program, host Keith Olbermann went on a rant against Tea Party-backed candidates; one target was Ron Johnson, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Wisconsin. Earlier in the year Johnson had testified against a bill that would relax the statute of limitations on cases involving the sexual abuse of minors. Olbermann played with words and attacked the Church saying that Johnson “testified against toughening laws on pedophiles and employers who shield them. He argued this could damage a business. A business like the Catholic Church.”

November 1
“Saturday Night Live” ran a program special of re-run episodes entitled the “Women of SNL.” During the special, they re-aired a clip from 2008 where Tina Fey took a shot at nuns. Fey said:

“You know what? B****es get stuff done. That’s why Catholic schools use nuns as teachers and not priests. They’re mean old clams and sleep on cots and are allowed to hit you. At the end of the school year you hated those b****es, but you knew the capital of Vermont.”

November 1
Bill Maher appeared on Wolf Blitzer’s CNN show where he discussed the remarks he had made about Muslims on his own HBO show in which he expressed concerns about the growing popularity of naming boys Muhammad in the U.K., noting the high birth rates of Muslims and how this does not bode well for the future. When Blitzer asked him to explain, he defended his statements fairly. When contrasted with the anti-Catholic comments he has being making for years  he looked like a hypocrite. It is obvious Maher is at home tolerating and contributing to anti-Catholicism.

November 7
The new HBO series “Boardwalk Empire,” took a shot at Catholics in a scene where a group of men were watching a silent film of a nun having sex. The shot of a nun on her hands and knees being penetrated from behind, and another that showed a man performing cunnilingus on her, was thrown into the show and had no relevance to the plot.

November 10
Jay Leno took a shot at the Church on an episode of the “Tonight Show” joking about a miscreant priest who ripped off his parish to pay for his online porn habit. Instead of going after this one priest, Leno attacked the entire Church, he said, “The Church transferred him to another parish that has free WiFi. Yeah, so that’s nice.”

November 22
On an episode of the Fox program “House,” a Latino man was vilified for his Catholic faith. The opening scene of the episode was of the man being nailed to a cross; he then began to spit up blood and was rushed to a hospital. When he got there, we learn that being nailed to a cross has become a ritual for him for every year so that his young daughter remains cancer-free; this was a “deal” he made with God. For the rest of the episode the man’s faith-healing method is condemned and portrayed as bizarre, barbaric, and silly.

The episode was relentless with its attacks on Catholicism, addressing issues such as embryonic stem cell research with sarcasm, calling faith delusional, and dubbing religion as something which is “communicable and it kills a lot of people.”

December 13
On an episode of “The View,” Denis Leary, discussed his new book which is a compilation of his Twitter posts. Joy Behar pulled one quote out as an example and read it to the audience. The quote was, “The pope is against gay marriage. This coming from a grown man who goes to work dressed like Lady Gaga.” After reciting the quote she laughed and called the book “good stuff.”

December 20
Comedy Central re-aired an episode of South Park titled “Bloody Mary.” The episode makes a mockery of Catholicism, suggesting that a statue of the Virgin Mary is bleeding and thus declared a miracle. Upon further investigation, the pope declares that a “chick” bleeding is “no miracle.” The original episode aired in 2005 and was pulled after complaints from the Catholic League.

December 22
Whoopi Goldberg, Joy Behar, Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Sherri Shepherd, bashed Catholics on an episode of “The View.” They went ballistic discussing the issue of the nun who authorized an abortion at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Arizona. The women failed to mention the fact that the parent organization of this hospital, Catholic Heathcare West, has a long history of flagrantly violating the teachings of the Church. No matter, the ladies took to trotting out miscreant priests, painted the Church as anti-women, and more.

December 23
A day after they went after the Church for the St. Joseph’s hospital situation, the women of “The View” went on an extended rant against Bill Donohue for his press release taking them to task. Elisabeth Hasselbeck went as far to tell Donohue to “Go to Hell.”

MUSIC

June 8
Lady Gaga released the video to her song “Alejandro” which featured her dressing as a nun, flashing a cross, swallowing a rosary and being raped by a group of S&M-type men. The pop star defended her video by calling it a “dedication of my love and appreciation for the gay community.”

August 22
Tacoma, WA – Lady Gaga, performed at a concert wearing a nun’s habit made of see-through plastic, exposing her underwear and only had x’s covering her breasts.

RADIO

June 2
During an interview on NPR, Samantha Bee of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” spoke about her Catholic upbringing and how mocking Catholicism is “joyful” and “pure pleasure” for her. During the interview, Bee discussed that she went to a “progressive Catholic school” that didn’t have “big gory Jesuses everywhere. They were monochromatic so you couldn’t see the blood dripping from the wounds of Jesus.” Bee also said that she had spoken with a lot of lapsed Catholics saying that they had a crush on Jesus, saying that He was “designed that way for young girls to find Him sexy and attractive.”

October 20
NPR fired Juan Williams after he made allegedly anti-Muslim comments. The Catholic League responded by pointing out that no one had ever been fired by NPR for their anti-Catholic fare. As early as 1997 NPR had been documented for various anti-Catholic remarks, among them is a song Tom Lehrer sang called, “The Vatican Rag,” some of the lyrics are as follows: “Try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer”; “Two, four, six, eight, time to Trans-substantiate.” This, however, didn’t merit Lehrer to be fired.

RESPONSE TO CNN DOCUMENTARY

The following is an excerpt from Bill Donohue’s response to a CNN documentary that aired September 25, 2010; the complete version is available online under “Special Reports.”

The program begins with music and graphics that set the tone: those who think Pope Benedict XVI has been adept at combating priestly sexual abuse must realize that there is “a darker, more complicated story.” Dark, yes, but from CNN’s perch, the story is not all that complicated: the pope is guilty of “foot-dragging and, perhaps, obstruction.”

CNN host Gary Tuchman says that “For decades, before he became pope, Joseph Ratzinger was a high-ranking Vatican official who, more than anyone else beside Pope John Paul, could have taken decisive action to stem the sexual abuse crisis.”

It is simply not true that Ratzinger was in charge of this issue “for decades.” In fact, he wasn’t given the authority to police the sexual abuse problem until 2001. What is truly astonishing is that Tuchman concedes as much later in the program. After he notes that “By 2001, the sexual abuse crisis was beginning to engulf the Catholic Church,” he says, “The pope gave Cardinal Ratzinger and the CDF (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) the power to cut through the bureaucracy and handle all sexual abuse cases directly.”

Nowhere in the program is there any evidence that the pope was guilty of obstruction of justice. This is a serious charge—the most serious made in the course of the documentary. Yet to throw this out, without ever producing evidence to substantiate it, is malicious. It won’t cut it to say that he was “perhaps” guilty of obstruction. CNN intentionally planted this seed and never explicitly addressed the subject of obstruction of justice again.

The program focuses on four miscreant priests. The first is Peter Hullermann. In 1986, he was convicted of sexually abusing boys while serving in  Germany. His case is central to the documentary because it questions the pope’s culpability.

After Hullermann was convicted, he was transferred to Munich for therapy. It should be noted that therapy was the preferred method for dealing with abusers at the time, both inside and outside the Catholic Church. Abusers were not seen, as they are today, as offenders deserving of punitive action; rather, they were seen as disturbed persons who could be rehabilitated via therapy. No matter, after his transfer, Hullermann was placed in a new parish.

The critical question is: Did Archbishop Ratzinger know that Hullermann was a convicted molester who was moved to another parish? We know he approved the transfer, but that’s about it. The Vatican maintains that it was Ratzinger’s deputy who placed Hullermann in the new parish. Importantly, CNN makes no claim to the contrary. Moreover, when the New York Times broke this story in March, the best it could do in establishing culpability was to say that Ratzinger’s office “was copied on a memo.” The Times also said that Church officials said the memo was routine and “unlikely to have landed on the archbishop’s desk.”

The case of Father Stephen Kiesle was included not to prove guilt on the part of the pope, but to add to the suspicion that he did not do enough.

CNN reports that Kiesle’s bishop, John Cummins, wanted him defrocked in 1981 after he was convicted of sexually abusing boys. Vatican officials, however, wanted more information; Cardinal Ratzinger had taken over as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith a week after the Vatican office made its ruling. Following Church norms  that existed at the time, Ratzinger said he could not defrock Kiesle because no one under 40 could be laicized, and he was in his thirties. Kiesle could have been ordered to stand trial, but because he was so close to turning 40 (and a trial is not a speedy process), a decision was made to wait. On February 13, 1987, the day before Kiesle’s 40th birthday, he was defrocked.

What CNN did not report is that Kiesle was removed from ministry following his conviction. Nor did it mention the curious fact that in 1982, while still technically a priest, Kiesle married the mother of a girl he had abused in 1973. But to mention such an oddity may have shifted blame away from the pope, thus muddying the bottom line.

Father Lawrence Murphy, who allegedly molested some 200 deaf boys in Wisconsin in the 1950s, is covered in depth. But it didn’t go far enough. What was omitted is startling.

Tuchman reports that “Father Murphy’s case would come to the direct attention of Cardinal Ratzinger.” (My emphasis.) The viewer then waits in vain for evidence that Murphy’s case came to the direct attention of the pope. There isn’t any. We know that Terry Kohut, who was one of Murphy’s victims, wrote to Ratzinger’s office, but neither CNN nor the New York Times (which first reported on this story) has ever provided evidence that Ratzinger was personally involved in this case.

Jeffrey Anderson, who has made tens of millions suing the Catholic Church, and hates the Church with a passion, is asked point blank by Tuchman, “Do you think Cardinal Ratzinger knew about the case of Father Murphy?” Anderson parses his words in textbook lawyerly fashion. “Well, we know the letters went to his secretary, [Tarcisio] Bertone.” This is not in dispute. But was Ratzinger directly involved? Anderson adds, “thus, that Ratzinger was directly involved.” So because Bertone fielded the letters,thus Ratzinger was directly involved? That Tuchman never challenged Anderson is telling.

Here is what CNN did not tell the viewer. The crimes alleged against Murphy extend to the 1950s, yet the civil authorities were not formally asked to investigate until the mid-1970s; following a probe, the police dropped the case. Fast-forward to 1996, the first time the Vatican is notified. The Vatican decides to ignore the fact that the statute of limitations has expired and orders a trial. Melodramatically, CNN characterizes the internal inquiry a “secret church trial,” as if internal probes at CNN for employee wrongdoing are televised.

CNN, like the New York Times before it, never bothered to interview the one person who may have known about Ratzinger’s knowledge of the case, Father Thomas Brundage. He was the Judicial Vicar, the one who presided over the case between 1996-1998. When asked this year about Ratzinger’s role, he said, “At no time in the case, at meetings that I had at the Vatican, in Washington, D.C. and in Milwaukee, was Cardinal Ratzinger’s name ever mentioned.” Brundage added that he was “shocked” when the media tried to tie Ratzinger to the Murphy case.

In CNN’s eyes, if there was one hero in this case, it was the Archbishop of Milwaukee at the time, Rembert Weakland. It credits him writing to Ratzinger in 1996 asking how to proceed against Murphy, noting that Weakland acceded to the Vatican’s request to stop the trial, knowing the priest was dying; Murphy died two days later. But there is much the viewer does not learn.

Weakland was anything but a hero in dealing with sexual abuse. In 1984, he branded as “libelous” those who reported cases of priestly sexual abuse, and was rebuked by a judge for doing so. In 1994, he accused those who reported such cases as “squealing.” Moreover, he had to resign when his lover, a 53-year-old man, revealed that Weakland paid him $450,000 to settle a sexual assault lawsuit (Weakland fleeced church coffers to pay the bill).

With regard to the Murphy case, Weakland is again anything but a hero. Last spring, in a section called “Documents Trail” posted on the website of the New York Times(alongside an article by Times reporter Laurie Goodstein) there is a revealing letter from the Coadjutor Bishop of Superior, Wisconsin, Raphael M. Fliss, to the Vicar for Personnel of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, Father Joseph A. Janicki. Bishop Fliss says, “In a recent conversation with Archbishop Weakland, I was left with the impression that it would not be advisable at this time to invite Father Murphy to work among the deaf.” The letter was dated July 9, 1980. So why did it take 16 years for Weakland to contact the Vatican about Murphy? CNN does not say.

The last case involves Father Alvin Campbell, an Illinois priest who pleaded guilty to sexual abuse of boys in 1985. Bishop Daniel Ryan visited Campbell in prison, asking him to leave the priesthood. After Campbell refused, Ryan asked Cardinal Ratzinger to defrock him. CNN reports that the request was refused because it did not come from Campbell.

This sounds strange, but there is more to the story. Bishop Ryan wanted Campbell defrocked quickly because he wanted to spare the victims a trial. This is understandable at one level, but there is still the matter of  civil liberties: the accused are entitled to their day in court. What CNN omitted from its coverage was that Bishop Ryan had the authority to remove Campbell from ministry, or go forward with the trial, recommending defrocking. He elected not to do so.

As CNN acknowledges, Ratzinger learned from the Campbell case and pressed Pope John Paul II to make serious changes in the way these cases were handled. “And from 2001 forward,” says Allen, “the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith became the beachhead for the Vatican for an aggressive response to the crisis.” True enough. And 2001 was the year that Pope John Paul II charged Cardinal Ratzinger with overseeing this issue. Because these changes occurred on Ratzinger’s watch, he made them happen.

After Father Thomas Reese makes some critical remarks, Tuchman concludes, “Cardinal Ratzinger was passionate about stamping out dissent. But there was never any public indication he was passionate about getting rid of pedophile priests.” This, along with the suggestion that the pope was guilty of obstruction of justice, marks the lowest point in the documentary.

If it wasn’t passion that provoked the pope to speak of the “filth” within the Church—he did so right before being elected—what was it? A cerebral exercise? And what was it that triggered him to reopen the case of Father Marcial Maciel, the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, and then seek to reform the Legionaries? Was it boredom?

Tuchman opines that “Vatican experts say Ratzinger silenced, censored or otherwise punished dozens of theologians during his reign at CDF.” The charge is risible on the face of it: there is infinitely more tolerance for dissent in the Catholic Church than exists in the typical American college or university.

From top to bottom, what CNN did was the televised version of what the New York Times did in print form earlier in the year. The goal was to tarnish the image of Pope Benedict XVI, making him out to be a co-conspirator in the scandal. Though it came up empty handed with proof of his culpability, there was enough innuendo to convict Snow White.

The timeline of the scandal, it needs to be said, was from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s. Ironically, those within the Catholic Church who pushed for “progressive” reforms, e.g., making the case for more relaxed sexual strictures in the seminaries, and who then recommended therapy to treat molesters—most of whom were homosexuals—are the very ones today pointing fingers at the pope for the scandal. That’s the real scandal, though it is not likely to be covered by CNN.

Miscellaneous

January 5
Joliet, IL – A large painting depicting the history of Jesus Christ, displayed for the Christmas season, was stolen from a home.

January 10
Wilkes-Barre, PA – A student of Kings College was found urinating on the Wilkes-Barre’s city nativity scene.

January 13
Tuscaloosa, AL – A statue of Jesus was stolen from the Catholic Social Services grounds. The statue, which cost $400, was the centerpiece of an Eagle Scout project that intended to revitalize the grounds.

January 14
Moulton, TX – Vandals broke desks, glass and cabinets in the youth ministry center, the parish hall, classrooms and offices at St. Joseph’s Church.

January 21
Victoria, TX – Vandals broke into church offices and pried open the office safe, pulled a copper cross from the church foyer, broke windows, and smashed office equipment at Holy Family Church.

March 13
Salt Lake City, UT – A bronze statue of St. Ambrose, valued at $30,000, was ripped from its concrete pedestal and stolen from St. Ambrose Church.

April 16
Cumberland, RI – Six bronze and brass bells, valued at over $100,000, were stolen from the Dormition of the Virgin March Church.

April 24
Charlotte, NC – The head and praying hands of a statue of the Virgin Mary were knocked off by vandals at St. Matthew Church.

May 2
Tinley Park, IL – For the second time in a year, a statue of Jesus was vandalized in front of Our Lady of Perpetual Help religious store. The vandals decapitated the statue and stole the head.

May 14
Galveston, TX – A statue of Jesus was stolen from the office of Catholic Charities.

May 16
Weymouth, MA – A 66-year-old statue of the Virgin Mary was decapitated and smashed into pieces outside of Immaculate Conception Church. The statue was placed in the church’s grotto to honor 16 men who were killed in World War II.

May 24
Maywood, CA – Vandals ransacked St. Rose of Lima parish school by writing “666” on the walls and sticking a knife in the face of a painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe. The police said that the vandalism was consistent with a hate crime.

June 31
Boston, MA – A relic from the Cross that Christ was crucified on was stolen from the Holy Cross Cathedral. The holding case was pried open and the relic was stolen.

July 24
New Orleans, LA – St. John the Baptist Catholic Church suffered between $300,000 and $1 million  worth of damage after vandals threw rocks through three vintage stained-glass windows.

August 1
Cincinnati, OH – Over a six week period vandals  caused approximately $250,000 worth of damage to St. Joseph New Cemetery. The graves of several of the city’s first Roman Catholic bishops were damaged as well as more than thirty monuments.

August 3
Scranton, PA – A thief broke into the tabernacle of a Scranton church, stealing the Holy Eucharist.

August 14
Richmond, VA – Four silver chalices were stolen from St. Paul’s Catholic Church. The church estimated it would cost about $4,000 to replace them.

August 16
San Francisco, CA – The church bell from St. Michael’s Korean Catholic Church was stolen by an unidentified thief. The bell’s estimated worth was more than $400.

October 4
Boles Acres, NM – Three people were charged with vandalizing the Our Lady of the Desert Catholic Church.  Among the damages were broken windows, destroyed pews, graffiti, and torn priest’s clothing. The damages amounted to more than $10,000.

October 8
Madison, NJ – A surveillance video showed five men destroying light fixtures, shrubs, tearing down signs, and destroying a mailbox at St. Paul Inside the Walls, a Catholic center in New Jersey.

October 31
Omaha, NE – A statue of the Virgin Mary that resides outside of Christ the King Church in Omaha fell victim to vandalism; the statue’s hands have been broken off. The estimated damage was upwards of $10,000.

November
Andalusia, AL – Two men were arrested for stealing sacramental wine, cash, and other valuable items from Christ the King Catholic Church. The men were charged, one count each, with third-degree burglary, third-degree theft of property and second-degree receiving stolen property.

December 19
La Marque, TX – A statue of Jesus at the only Roman Catholic Church in La Marque was vandalized. The statue was found marked with drawings and had slogans such as “Who dis?” written on it with spray paint. Church officials estimate the damages will be about $10,000 to repair.

December 23
Isle La Motte, VT – Two blue spruce trees, from St. Anne’s shrine, were victims of vandalism and cut down two days before Christmas.

Executive Summary

Every year in the Catholic League’s history has its similarities and unique qualities. What made 2009 so different from past years was the extent to which government threatened the rights of Catholics and the Catholic Church. That it occurred at the local, state and federal levels made the onslaught all the more ominous.

Americans expect government to protect rights, not threaten them. But in the case of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the government acted badly. We were back in court again in 2009, represented by the fine counsel from the Thomas More Law Center, seeking justice in a case that originated in 2006. That was the year this governmental body lashed out at the Catholic Church in a vicious and unconstitutional way: it sought to intimidate Catholics from exercising their religious liberty and free speech rights.

In 2006, the members of the Board of Supervisors passed a resolution labeling the Vatican a “foreign country” that was “meddling” in the affairs of San Franciscans. The accusation of “meddling” boiled down to one thing: the Catholic Church is opposed to gay and lesbian couples adopting children. Now anyone is free to disagree with this position, but it is indefensible for the agents of the state to call the teachings of a world religion “hateful,” as well as “insensitive and ignorant,” simply because it holds to a traditional understanding of marriage. This is more than preposterous, it is downright dangerous.

The First Amendment does more than guard religious institutions from the encroachment of government, it makes it unconstitutional for government officials to create a hostile environment for the faithful. At the end of the year, our case went before a panel of eleven judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; the en banc panel reviewed an earlier opinion rendered by three judges of the Ninth Circuit that upheld the resolution. That the courts even have to consider such a case is troubling enough, never mind the continued obstinacy of the Board of Supervisors.

At the state level, the most egregious violation of religious liberty took place in Connecticut. In March, two gay lawmakers sought to take over the administrative affairs of the Catholic Church. Bold as could be, the bigots decided that the state government had a right to strip pastors of their authority and rewrite Church strictures governing decision-making. No other religion was cited, making it plain that the kind of animus against Catholicism as witnessed in San Francisco was operative in Connecticut as well.

Fortunately, a coalition of Catholics prevailed. Led by Bridgeport Bishop William Lori, Connecticut bishops, priests, religious and lay people fought back, with assistance from the Catholic League. We called for the expulsion of the lawmakers, blanketed the media with news releases and did what we could to galvanize Catholic League members in the state. Pointedly, we branded this effort a “fascistic stunt.” On July 1, the Ethics Office that had been triggered to investigate the Catholic Church dropped the matter altogether.

Before considering actions taken by the federal government, just consider what San Francisco and Connecticut officials sought to do. Their goal was to silence and cripple the Catholic Church. Had it been reversed—had the Catholic Church condemned elected officials for “meddling” in the affairs of the Church for merely disagreeing with its teachings, or if it announced that it was going to take over the operations of a state government—there would have been a backlash the likes of which we have never seen. And there would have been lawsuits galore. It is quite disturbing that Catholics are still fighting for fundamental rights in 2009.

Leading the charge against the Catholic Church at the federal level is the Obama administration. Such hostility to matters Catholic has not been seen in Washington for a very long time. The president refused to speak at Georgetown University unless it agreed to put a drape over the Latin words for Jesus (he didn’t want IHS to appear in the background when he spoke); he chose several anti-Catholics to join his staff; and he worked hard for a health care bill that contained public funding for abortion and jeopardized the conscience rights of health care employees.

It could have been worse. Obama came to Washington pledging to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), the most draconian piece of legislation ever targeted at the Catholic Church. FOCA would have forced the closing of Catholic hospitals. Why? Because it contained language that would have allowed the government to require Catholic hospitals, as a condition of receiving federal funds, to perform abortions. Obviously, the bishops made plain their opposition, and because they succeeded in stopping FOCA from being reintroduced, the Obama team decided to slip abortion funding in backdoor through the health care bill.

While it is entirely possible to be pro-abortion and not be anti-Catholic, the issue of abortion is taken so seriously by the Catholic Church that not to give this issue considerable coverage in this volume would clearly be delinquent. Moreover, there is evidence that anti-Catholicism marred the debate over health care. Amy Sullivan, for instance, said in the pages of Time magazine that “anti-Catholic sentiment and rhetoric is already flying fast and loose in the pro-choice community”; she took the occasion to warn the bishops about making matters worse (as if the bishops were responsible for causing a bigoted response). 

Harry Knox. Kevin Jennings. Chai Feldblum. Dawn Johnsen. These are just some of the people with a history of hostility towards Catholicism that Obama found worthy of nominating. Knox is known for insulting the pope; Jennings previously funded an anti-Catholic group; Feldblum has a record of subordinating religious liberties to so-called sexual rights; and Johnsen once tried to strip the Catholic Church of its tax exempt status.

It is no wonder that when President Obama was picked to speak, and to receive an award, at the University of Notre Dame, it became a hot-button issue. Over 80 bishops issued statements opposing the graduation honors, and Notre Dame came under fire from many alumni, as well as from Catholics who long identified with the university as a beacon of Catholicism. The position of the Catholic League was not to oppose Obama speaking on campus, but to oppose honoring him.

There is a big section in this volume on the pope. That is not good news. In 2009, Pope Benedict XVI made some decisions which some Catholics, as well as non-Catholics, took exception to, and that is all fine and good. What is not acceptable, however, is vitriol. There is a difference between robust disagreement and vile rhetoric, and this annual report contains many examples of the latter.

It is an indication of how incivility has trumped common courtesy in this country that so many obscene comments were made against the Holy Father in 2009. One of the trigger issues was the pope’s outreach to the St. Pius X Society, a breakaway group of ultra-conservative Catholics. Among the members of this group is Richard Williamson, a bishop whom the Catholic League acknowledged held some “loopy and wholly discredited views on the Holocaust.” Yes, the vetting process should have been stronger, but this did not justify the over-the-top remarks made against the pope.

Another issue which set off the alarms in anti-Catholic circles was the pope’s questioning of the utility of condoms. In some parts of America, this is tantamount to heresy. Many condom advocates wonder how any reasonable person can disagree with their belief that condoms protect against HIV/AIDS. Never mind that researchers like Harvard’s Edward C. Green have been able to show that “the best evidence we have supports the pope’s comments.” What works, according to Green, are behavioral matters such as faithfulness to one’s spouse and abstinence. No matter, in the eyes of Catholic bashers, the pope is responsible for Africans killing themselves by not wearing condoms.

Ripping the pope will always garner media attention, but when it’s a private person who is being savaged, the aggrieved needs an organization like the Catholic League to whip up public opinion. Such was the case of Larry Grard, a reporter for Maine’s Morning Sentinel for some 19 years. He was fired for e-mailing a letter to a gay activist with whom he disagreed; the activist said hate was endemic among those who oppose gay marriage, and Grard said it was the other side that generated the hate. Not only was Grard fired (he used his own personal e-mail account), so was his wife (she wrote a bimonthly column on cooking). We were happy to provide Grard with advice and legal contacts to fight back, and he certainly did. The year ended with the case unresolved.

When we began the year, we knew that “Angels & Demons,” the Ron Howard adaptation of Dan Brown’s book by that name, would be among the biggest issues for the Catholic League in 2009. Knowing how much publicity came our way when we went on the attack against the Brown-Howard film “The Da Vinci Code,” we knew full well that a booklet on “Angels & Demons” would provide similar results. We were right.

There is something unseemly about the Brown-Howard tag team. They know that what they are peddling about the Catholic Church is not mere propaganda, it is a string of lies made up out of whole cloth. Duplicitous all the way, when they are pressed to buttress their tales with historical evidence, they repair to their fall-back position—it is just fiction. But that’s only when they are pressed: otherwise, they are content to pass their stuff off as if it were true.

When Brown and Howard maintain that “it is a historical fact” that the Illuminati were formed in the 1600s, they are lying through their teeth. They lie because they want to pitch Galileo—the ultimate bogeyman in anti-Catholic lore—as a member. But the fact is that the Illuminati didn’t exist until 1776, almost 150 years after Galileo died.

If this were all that Brown-Howard did to hurt the Catholic Church, it would be no big deal. The real damage done by them was selling the pernicious and flat-out false notion that the Catholic Church is anti-science. Nothing could be further from the truth, but in the minds of those ill-disposed to Catholicism, it rings true.

Our case against Brown-Howard was sealed when a Canadian priest, dressed incognito, spent a few days with the film crew for “Angels & Demons.” As recounted in our booklet on the movie, Father Bernard O’Connor revealed just how convinced the crew was of the “wretchedness” of the Catholic Church. Speaking of Brown, one of the crew said, “Like most of us, he often says that he would do anything to demolish that detestable institution.” The evidence doesn’t get much plainer than this.

HBO is home to more anti-Catholic shows than any other TV station, and what happened in 2009 just added to its reputation. Bill Maher is the major reason why HBO leads the pack, so it was not surprising that his show was chosen by comedian Sarah Silverman to bash the pope. She began her tirade by lamenting the problem of world hunger, but then quickly turned with a vengeance on the Catholic Church. Out of all the institutions in the world, she fingered the Catholic Church as the one that should divest all its holdings and give all the loot to the poor. After making a gratuitous shot at the Church for its “involvement” in the Holocaust, she ended with a vulgar comment about the pope. This wasn’t humor—it was a crude and totally unprovoked hit job on Catholicism.

A few weeks later, HBO was the venue of another obscene shot: Larry David, the creator of “Seinfeld,” was depicted urinating on a picture of Jesus. Naturally, we were chastised by defenders of David that it was done in jest. I had a chance to respond to this lame argument on “Fox and Friends” by suggesting, “Let him go and pee on the face of the president, and then let him explain to African-Americans that it was all in jest.”

It wasn’t HBO that was the source of the most egregious attack on the Catholic Church in 2009—it was Showtime. An episode of “Penn & Teller,” I wrote at the time, “will go down in history as one of the ugliest assaults on Catholics, or any other group, ever to air on television.” This was not an exaggeration.

From beginning to end, this was the most relentless Catholic bashing imaginable. The lies, coupled with obscenities of the most extreme sort, were enough to make any fair-minded non-Catholic wince, if not throw up. Because CBS owns Showtime, we targeted the broadcasting giant. Our campaign worked.

We raised the money to send over 1,000 copies of the DVD to every bishop in the nation, along with leading religious figures from every major faith group. We also posted a copy of the show on our website, encouraging members to see it for themselves. And, of course, we implored everyone to contact CBS.

There is no question CBS got the message. My conversations with a top CBS official convinced me of that. Every huge institution has an army of lawyers prepared to handle litigation, so it is not a big deal when they have to go to court. But no institution, no matter what its size, wants to have its reputation sullied in the court of public opinion. We knew this, and that is why we defiantly distributed and posted online copies of the video. The number of complaints lodged against CBS was considerable, and the prestigious nature of the complainants made our campaign all the more effective.

Penn & Teller may pose as comedians, but in the case of Penn Jillette, at least, his atheism and deep-seated hatred of the Catholic Church often flares. We live in a time when atheists are using every microphone available to vent their bigotry. No, not all atheists are angry or bigoted, but in the current climate there is no shortage of intellectuals, activists, pundits and entertainers who are. They even organized the first annual International Blasphemy Day in September.

The Center for Inquiry launched this effort, choosing the anniversary of the 2005 publication of the Danish cartoons that so inflamed the Muslim world as the inaugural day. Interestingly, the events of the day had nothing at all to do with expressing contempt for Islam. No, it was Christianity the atheists wanted to beat up on, especially Catholicism.

Atheists organized at Christmas to erect their childish signs and posters in public places, often alongside nativity scenes. Because they believe in nothing, and stand for nothing positive, they choose the Christmas season to showcase their brilliance. The Freedom from Religion Foundation and the American Humanist Association were the most active of the atheist groups. The biggest splash of the season, however, went to the animal rights phonies from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). Leaving aside the fact that they kill 95 percent of the animals in their care, PETA conducted a Christmas fundraiser by picturing a Playboy girl naked, save for a large crucifix that barely covered her private parts.

We ended the year on a strong note when England’s most well known advocate of atheism for kids, Philip Pullman, announced that there would be no more film adaptations of his trilogy, His Dark Materials. The movie version of his book, The Golden Compass, was met with a boycott by the Catholic League in 2007. It worked. Pullman wanted to see a movie based on the second and third volumes of his work, The Subtle Knife and The Amber Spyglass, but New Line Cinema was scared off after our successful boycott.

Our protest was based on the conviction that even though the film was modified so as not to blatantly offend Catholics, the movie was still bait for the books; we didn’t want parents to be fooled into buying the trilogy for their children. We also knew that each book in the series was more anti-Catholic than the previous one, making it all the more important that the first movie flop at the box office in the United States.

Pullman’s condemnation of the Catholic League, which was widely quoted throughout Britain, put a smile on our face. When he accused me of “triumphalism,” I couldn’t resist saying, “The accusation is accurate. I am positively gloating.”

Not everything we do is this satisfying, but fighting the good fight never fails to satisfy, and that is rewarding in and of itself.

Activist Organizations

January 3
San Francisco, CA – Opponents of Proposition 8 vandalized Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church, in the heart of San Francisco’s gay Castro community; the California resolution, passed by voters in November 2008, rejected the legalization of gay marriage. Swastikas were painted on the church and the names “Ratzinger” (referring to Pope Benedict XVI) and “Niederauer” (referring to San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer) were scrawled beside the Nazi symbols.   January 12 The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) over its partnership with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to fight human trafficking. The ACLU filed suit because the USCCB does not use the money received from HHS to provide emergency contraception or abortion.  The ACLU claimed that the bishops were imposing their religious beliefs on victims of human trafficking by denying them access to services that the Church considers immoral, thereby making the government’s involvement unconstitutional.

January 14
Americans United for Separation of Church and State told a federal appeals court that a “Christian cross is not an appropriate symbol to memorialize deceased veterans of many different faith perspectives and should not be displayed on government property.”

The case, Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America v. City of San Diego, concerns the Mt. Soledad cross that is displayed at a public veterans’ memorial. Joining Americans United on the brief were: Hadassah; the Women’s Zionist Organization of America, Inc.; Interfaith Alliance; Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers; Military Religious Freedom Foundation; Progressive Christians Uniting; and the Unitarian Universalist Association.

January 16
Ouachita Parish, LA – Americans United for Separation of Church and State issued a press release claiming that a public school would be violating the Constitution if it sponsored a field trip to a Christian event called “Just for Jesus.” The organization told the school officials to “stop meddling in the religious lives of students.”

February 4
Madison, WI – The Freedom From Religion Foundation said that two governmental bodies in Wisconsin had to cease opening meetings with prayer.

February 5
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) issued a statement titled “Nothing fails like prayer” in response to President Barack Obama’s appearance at the National Prayer Breakfast. The organization took umbrage with the president’s words: “Responsibility for the well-being of people…requires a living, breathing, active faith.” FFRF claimed that with these words the president was “broadening an entanglement between church and state.”

The organization claimed that, “Nothing fails like prayer. Is there a greater confession of human failure than turning to prayer?” FFRF went onto say, “to hear our new president laud prayer as if prayer accomplishes something, is most disappointing.” The group also called prayer the “ultimate non-action, the ultimate cop-out.”

March 12
A supporter of Voice of the Faithful (VOTF) lashed out at the Catholic League because of our opposition to a bill in Connecticut that called for a restructuring of the Catholic Church. In the message, the supporter said, “VOTF is fighting to correct the many scum bag bishops who still exist.”

April 8
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation called for the court martial of the Army’s chief of chaplains for designating a day of fasting and prayer for chaplains. Foundation president Mikey Weinstein said, “This represents a perfect, quintessential example of the fact that our United States military has become infused, essentially, with the Christian mirror image of the type of Islam that is pushed by al-Qaida and the Taliban.”

April 12
San Francisco, CA – The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence celebrated their 30th anniversary at a gala event at which some of the men danced naked. The notoriously anti-Catholic group was given a proclamation from the California state senate by State Sen. Mark Leno.

The group also held its “Hunky Jesus” competition in which men dressed as Jesus in some of the most disgusting ways imaginable.

June 7
Santa Rosa County, FL – Nearly 400 graduating students at Pace High School stood and prayed the Lord’s Prayer in an act of defiance against the ACLU; the activist organization had previously filed a lawsuit against the school because of an alleged prayer by a coach at an award ceremony.

The ACLU contended that something should have been done to prevent the students from reciting the prayer at graduation.

June 24
Americans United for Separation of Church and State asked U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to “terminate or investigate nine federal grants awarded to faith-based groups that proselytize and that discriminate in hiring.” Among the groups  Americans United asked to terminate were those that provide assistance to at-risk youth, several providing drug-prevention programs and another that assists the poor.

This was just another attempt by the activist group to completely gut the faith-based system.

June 27 & 28
San Francisco, CA – The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence dishonored Archbishop George Niederauer with a “Pink Brick award” during the San Francisco Pride Celebration and Parade. This was the second time the archbishop received this award; it is given to the person or organization that the anti-Catholic group deems to have caused the most harm to the homosexual community.

July 13
The Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates in response to a prayer that was recited at a D-Day commemoration. The Foundation was upset that the chaplain invoked the name of Jesus in his prayer and said that he “overstepped the decorum required of military chaplains speaking to general audiences.”

In the letter, the Foundation urged Gates to issue new guidelines for military chaplains and staff so they “may not abuse their positions to proselytize, recruit for religion or promote sectarian doctrine on military time.”

July 14
Washington, D.C. – The Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit to stop the engraving of the phrase “In God We Trust,” and the Pledge of Allegiance at the Capitol Visitor Center.

August 18
In an article found on the Huffington Post, Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, ripped the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. She said, “Seems that, if the U.S. Conference had its way, the national health care system would make American women second-class citizens and deny them access to benefits they currently have.”  In addition, she said that abroad the bishops’ “hard-line opposition to women’s rights also endangers millions of women around the globe.”

August 31
Petoskey, MI – The Petoskey Board of Education reversed its decision to use the term “Christmas break” rather than the “Winter holiday break” on its school calendar. The decision came a week after the Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter claiming that by changing the name to “Christmas break,” the board “alienates all non-Christian and non-believing school children.”

September 27
San Francisco, CA – The 26th annual Folsom Street Fair was held and did not have the anti-Catholic items that it carried in 2007, sparking our boycott of Miller Brewing, a sponsor of the event. Even though the event lacked the items, it still featured a cage dancer in front of St. Joseph’s Church. Also, the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence—as they have done for several years—worked the door for the fair “helping to greet people and collect much-needed funds for charity.”

September 30
The Center for Inquiry, an atheist organization, launched the first International Blasphemy Day. It chose the day which marked the anniversary of the 2005 publication of the Danish cartoons that so inflamed Muslims worldwide.

Billed as a free speech event designed to oppose such things as a Muslim-sponsored U.N. resolution banning criticism of religion, the day drew the support of people like PZ Myers; the professor at the University of Minnesota known for intentionally desecrating a consecrated Host. Myers said the day was established to “mock and insult religion without fear of murder, violence, and reprisal.”

Bill Donohue told the media: “They are all such phonies. The stated purpose of Blasphemy Day has nothing to do with any religion but Islam, yet there was not one scheduled event insulting Muslims. We can only guess why. So the religious haters showed once more that it is Christians, especially Catholics, that they want to bash.”

In Washington, D.C., artist Dana Ellyn exhibited her painting, “Jesus Does His Nails,” a portrait of Jesus polishing a nail jammed into his hand. In Los Angeles, there was a film about a gay molesting priest and another about a boy who is so angry about being sent to bed that he asks God to kill his parents. Also, American Atheists conducted “De-Baptisms” in New Jersey.

October 7
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on the constitutionality of a seven-foot cross placed on public land in the Mojave National Preserve in California. We said that the cross should be allowed on the land.

In 1892, the same court ruled that “this is a Christian nation.” Ever since, radical secularists have tried to stamp out this reality, holding that it excludes non-Christians. It does, and that is because the country’s founding was not the work of non-Christians.

That same day the New York Times carped over the cross. Defensively, its editorial began by saying that this case leads to such overheated charges as, “There is a war against Christianity under way; or civil liberties groups are trying to turn this into a secular nation.” Both accusations are accurate. Consider who is bringing the suit against the World War I veterans who first erected the cross in 1934, the ACLU—an organization marked with an anti-Christian animus since its founding in 1920.

October 14
Montgomery County, MD – Feminists from Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the National Organization for Women (NOW) opposed the bid of Holy Cross, a Catholic hospital, to run a new medical facility due to its opposition to abortion. These feminists claimed that if Holy Cross won the bid, rather than Adventist HealthCare which is run by the Seventh Day Adventist Church, “indigent citizens” would be harmed because of the Church’s restrictions on abortion. One member of NOW said that Holy Cross “should get out of the way.”

October 31
Sarasota, FL – At the Halloween party for the Planned Parenthood of South West and Central Florida, a male staff member came dressed as a pregnant nun. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune, which is owned by the New York Times, lauded the party as saying, “This event has set the standard by which all Halloween parties will be measured.”

November 5
American Atheists called for an IRS investigation into the actions of Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio. The reason for calling the investigation, American Atheists said, was that Bishop DiMarzio praised State Rep. Vito Lopez for defeating a bill that would have treated sex abuse in public and private institutions differently.

November 18
Enfield, CT – Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the ACLU demanded that the Enfield Public Schools stop holding their graduation at a Christian church and to hold them at a secular location instead.

A lawyer for Americans United claimed, “Students and their families should not have to choose between attending graduation and being subjected to proselytizing religious messages.”

November 20
Washington, D.C. – A homosexual website, ChurchOuting.org, was launched with the intent of publicly disclosing the gay priests serving in the Archdiocese of Washington. The goal of this outing was to intimidate gay priests, as well as heterosexual priests who may be “romantically involved,” into voicing objections to the Church’s opposition to gay marriage.

The initiative was the work of Phil Attey, self-described as a “Liberal-Gay-Ardent Obama Supporter”; he was active in the Obama Pride Metro-DC campaign. According to a news report, “Attey is going to approach priests he thinks are gay, and warn them that they better stop lobbying against gay people, seeing how gay they are…or…else?”

Catholic priests were also being pressured to sign the “Declaration of Religious Support for Marriage Equality,” a statement by Clergy United for Marriage Equality. The statement, while it was not one we support, was respectfully written. Accordingly, we wrote to members of the Steering Committee of this group and asked that they disassociate themselves from this attempted hijacking of their effort.

February 12 – 14, 26 – 28
Orlando & Tampa, FL – The art show “Nude Nite” appeared over two weekends in two separate cities. The exhibition featured a couple of pieces that were disturbing. A painting, “Easter Candy,” by Emily Hogan, depicted the Blessed Mother with a breast exposed and a chocolate Easter bunny nursing from her. In the background of the painting are two flying Easter bunny angels. Another offensive piece was a photograph named “Absolution.” The picture featured a nude woman in a crucifixion pose, tangled in barbed wire.

According to its website, “Nude Nite” prides itself on controversial works including “political, religious and social issues in keeping with the nude theme. Works that make people laugh are always popular but equally, the disturbing and uncomfortable.”

February 13
Hollywood, CA – The art exhibit, “The Congregation of Forgotten Saints,” featured paintings that attacked Christianity. One of the paintings featured Christ with His tongue sticking out and kneeling next to a toilet filled with blood. Behind Him is a cricket dressed as a monk.

April 6
San Diego, CA – The Chuck Jones Gallery displayed a painting in its front window that replaces Jesus and the apostles of Leonardo Da Vinci’s “The Last Supper” with Looney Tunes cartoon characters such as Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck. The painting by artist Glen Tarnowski is named “The Last Gathering.”

April 8 – 13
New York, NY – The Museum of Modern Art featured the film “The Pope’s Toilet” during Holy Week through Easter Monday. The movie—which was released two years prior—“takes an oblique dig at [the Catholic] church that, the movie suggests, may have failed its most disadvantaged followers,” according to the New York Times. When it debuted at the Toronto Film Festival, it was described as blending “the sacred and profane.”

We objected to this due to its venue and timing. We checked to see what movies ran during Ramadan and Yom Kippur and found nothing offensive toward Muslims or Jews. During Ramadan, “Hollywood on the Hudson: Filmmaking in New York, 1920-39” was featured and during Yom Kippur, “Delwende,” a movie about African patriarchy, was shown.

April 17 – May 10
St. Petersburg, FL – The anti-Christian musical “Altar Boyz” played at the American Stage in the Park. The show is about an all-male band that sings “Christian-themed” songs that ridicule Christianity. Also, the choreography involves the performers striking crucifixion poses.

April 18 – May 2
Philadelphia, PA – The play “Show/Tell” ran at the small Shubin Theatre. The one act play is about a priest who has AIDS and “struggles with questions of faith between visits from Joey…the young employee of the institution [in which the priest resides] he pays for sexual activity.”

May 1 – May 30
Boston, MA – The anti-Christian musical “Jerry Springer—The Opera” played at the Boston Center for the Arts. The play mocks the crucifixion, trashes the Eucharist and presents the Blessed Virgin as a woman who was “raped by an angel.”

May 14 – 25
Orlando, FL – We received an e-mail stating that the anti-Catholic play “Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All for You” was going to run at the Orlando International Fringe Theatre Festival. After we investigated the issue, we found that the e-mail was sent to us by the show’s director; he was hoping to bait us into publicly condemning the production. We decided not to call attention to the play nor did we issue a statement to the media. Instead we contacted the State of Florida Division of Cultural Affairs and the Orange County Arts and Cultural Affairs Office; these entities provided public money for the festival, which also staged “Corpus Christi.”

We pointed out that we are fully aware that fringe festivals feature edgy material but noted that such events should not include bigoted productions. In addition, one of the purported aims of this annual festival is to promote diversity. By definition, that would include not showcasing intolerance. We asked for an explanation as to why public money was being used to promote Catholic-bashing plays. We received no response.

We used this approach so that these government agencies know that Catholics object to taxpayer dollars funding anti-Catholic bigotry with the expectation that there will be a more careful review of grants in the future. We were able to make our point without giving unwarranted publicity to those who are admittedly on the fringe.

September 5 & 12
New York, NY – “Shakespeare’s Anti-Christian Satires: The Virgin Mary Parodies,” ran at the Manhattan Theatre Source and was performed by the Dark Lady Players—a group that performs Shakespeare’s plays according to its own interpretation of them.

The director, John Hudson, contended, “The allegorical depictions of the Virgin Mary in the plays are not merely bad taste, they are scathing, even shocking parodies of the most sacred Christian doctrines.” The plays “Hamlet,” “Othello,” and “Romeo and Juliet” were interpreted in “The Virgin Mary Parodies.”

March 25
New York, NY – The manager of the New York Palace Hotel was fired after ordering an employee to remove ashes from his forehead on Ash Wednesday. The managing director of the posh hotel—located across the street from St. Patrick’s Cathedral—told a bell captain to “wipe that f*****g s**t off [his] face.”

September 24 – 25
Rockford, IL – We received word that an abortion clinic was displaying an offensive poster in its window, depicted Jesus giving the middle finger. Bill Donohue wrote to Patrick W. Hayes, Legal Director of Rockford:

“I am aware that the Northern Illinois Women’s Center has long been the subject of controversy in Rockford; the rights of pro-life demonstrators have allegedly been violated. That is an important issue, but that is not the reason why I am contacting you. My concern rests with the egregious provocation of Christians attendant to the enclosed graphic of Jesus Christ extending his middle finger; the inscription, “Even Jesus Hates You,” appears below it. This graphic is currently being displayed in the window of the Center, in full view of adults and children; it has also been displayed, at various times, in the past.

“Under Part I, Chapters 19-3 and 19-4, ‘Offensive Uses of Property’ and ‘Permitting Offensive Use of Property,’ respectively, of the City of Rockford’s Code of Ordinance, it is illegal to ‘disturb or destroy the peace of the neighborhood in which such building or premises are situated, or be dangerous or detrimental to health.’

“This incendiary picture, designed to inflame Christian passions by assaulting their sensibilities and denigrating their religion—in a vile and obscene manner—constitutes such an infraction. As such, I am requesting that you take appropriate action against the Center to put an end to such needless provocation. Thank you for your consideration.”

The next day, Donohue received a letter from Hayes stating that his office asked the owner of the Northern Illinois Women’s Center to remove the offensive poster. But Hayes compared the image of Jesus to the “graphic photographic depictions of completed abortions” on the signs of demonstrators in front of the clinic. Hayes stated that he shared our disappointment in the depiction of Jesus, and also sympathized “with Muslims who felt that cartoons printed in several American newspapers were blasphemous to their religion.” But he said his job was to “recognize and protect the rights of those whose intelligence and scruples” that he questions.

Donohue thanked Hayes for his intervention, but also took issue with him about some other matters. Below is an excerpt of his letter:

“Your analogy between the poster in question and pictures of aborted children fails. The pictures are a representation of real life—they are not deliberately doctored. Nor are they a bigoted portrayal. Moreover, anti-war protesters regularly show pictures of combatants and innocents killed in war, yet no one seeks to compare them to hate speech. By contrast, depicting Jesus Christ telling Christians ‘F— You’ is not only contrived, it is an in-your-face obscene provocation, coming dangerously close to ‘fighting words’ (‘fighting words’ are not given free speech protection by the U.S. Supreme Court).

“You are factually incorrect to say that American newspapers carried the inoffensive pictures of Muhammad: not only did none of the mainstream newspapers reprint them, not a single network or cable television station carried them. Therefore, there is something bizarre, if not insulting, about your parallel sympathies for Christians and Muslims in these two very different situations: none of the cartoons came even close to showing Muhammad telling Muslims ‘F— You.’”

October
Spirit Halloween carried particularly offensive costumes this Halloween. “Happy Priest” was a costume of a priest with an erection, and the “Thank You Father” nun costume depicted a pregnant nun.

November 10
Waterville, ME – Larry Grard, a reporter for Maine’s Morning Sentinel, was fired days after he sent an e-mail (from his own personal account) to Trevor Thomas of the Human Rights Campaign. After the bid to secure gay marriage in Maine had failed, Thomas blamed the hatred of gays for the loss. Grard, a Catholic, wrote back blaming Thomas’ side for generating hate: “Who are the hateful, venom-spewing ones? Hint: Not the yes on 1 crowd. You hateful people have been spreading nothing but vitriol since this campaign began. Good riddance!”

In a related act, one that sounded like reprisal to us, Grard’s wife, who wrote a bimonthly cooking column for the paper, was subsequently fired. She was told that her work was “no longer a good fit.”

January 22
Spokane, WA – Officials at the Community Colleges of Spokane and Spokane Falls Community College threatened pro-life students with expulsion if they held a pro-life event on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. The officials deemed the students’ message “discriminatory” and “biased.” The Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit against the schools.

February 3
Washington, DC – The College Republicans at George Washington University found a number of crosses, used for a pro-life demonstration, desecrated in its office.

One cross had a penis drawn on it and was covered with a condom; it was hung upside down from a sign in the College Democrats’ office. Another cross had the word “Darwin” scrawled on it and a third featured the words, “Take a condom,” with a wrapped condom attached to the bottom. The last desecrated cross showed a crudely drawn stick figure of Jesus.

The College Democrats issued an apology after investigating the desecrations and found that a member of the club confessed to the outrageous vandalism.

February 13
Los Angeles, CA – A student at Los Angeles City College filed a lawsuit against the school for being called a “fascist bastard” and told to “ask God what [his] grade is” by a professor. This followed a speech that the student made in November 2008 on how he had seen God work miracles in his life and in the lives of those around him.

The Alliance Defense Fund, which filed the suit on behalf of the student, said, “Public institutions of higher learning cannot selectively censor Christian speech. This student was speaking well within the confines of his professor’s assignment when he was censored and ultimately threatened with expulsion.”

February 18
Athens, GA – As part of its Sexual Responsibility program, the University of Georgia placed a poster in the dormitories that misappropriated Christian iconography to promote condom distribution. Within hours of our press release addressing this situation, we received an apology from a university administrator.

The controversy revolved around a poster of the famous Michelangelo painting in the Sistine Chapel that features the hand of God giving life to Adam; the university’s poster hijacked this treasured piece of art to show God handing Adam a condom. The poster was used as part of the University of Georgia’s Sexual Responsibility Week, but surely if condom distribution was to be part of that program, it could have been done without needlessly offending the religious sensibilities of Catholics and Protestants alike.

In his letter to Dr. Rodney D. Bennett, Vice President for Student Affairs, Bill Donohue said, “I hasten to add that the University of Georgia would never choose a depiction of Muhammed to hawk condoms. Indeed, only a few years ago an inoffensive depiction of this Islamic figure in a Danish cartoon led to murder and churches being burned to the ground. One can only imagine what would have happened had he been portrayed pushing condoms to youth.”

A few hours later, after receiving a copy of Donohue’s letter via e-mail, Bennett called Donohue to apologize for the offensive poster. During the course of their conversation, Bennett told Donohue that he had received numerous e-mails from Catholic League members expressing their outrage over the poster. Dr. Bennett told Donohue that he was not aware of the poster until we contacted him, but when he saw it, he acted swiftly and responsibly: his apology was as sincere as it was thorough. He pledged to take “corrective action,” doing what he can to make sure that something like this does not happen again on campus. Not only did he convey his “deepest apology” over the phone, he also put it in writing.

Donohue wrote a letter to the president of the University of Georgia, Dr. Michael F. Adams, commending him for choosing Dr. Bennett as his Vice President for Student Affairs. In our press release ending our dispute with the university, we said that it is “too bad other officials, in and out of education, aren’t as honest and diligent as Dr. Bennett.”

But it didn’t take long for the enemies of Catholicism to rear their heads. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran a piece on its website on our victory, and in the comments following the article there were numerous posts of anti-Catholicism (see below for a sample).

March 12
Ypsilanti, MI – A graduate student was dismissed from Eastern Michigan University for not affirming homosexual behavior as morally acceptable. Before her dismissal, she was given a hearing in which the EMU faculty denigrated her Christian beliefs. The Alliance Defense Fund filed a lawsuit against the university and said that “Christian students shouldn’t be penalized for holding onto their beliefs.”

April 15
Jacksonville, FL – A federal judge ruled that an elementary school could not sing the country song, “In God We Still Trust,” at a school assembly. The judge said that the song is “patently religious and proselytizing” and cited the lyrics: “There’s no separation…. We’re one nation under Him…. Now there are those among us who want to push Him out and erase His name from everything this country is all about…. Now it’s the time for all believers to make our voices heard.”

May 20 – August 10
New York, NY – We got word that two teachers—one of whom is a representative of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT)—at Brooklyn Technical High School were denied the request to take Ascension Thursday as a religious observance day. No reason was given for the denial other than the principal claimed that he spoke with two Catholics who told him the Holy Day of Obligation wasn’t a big deal. When the UFT representative explained to the principal the importance of the holiday, the principal said that he should go to church at night. It should not go unnoted that the principal had accepted a number of Jewish teachers’ requests to observe Shavuot a few days later, and allows an assistant principal to practice her Islamic faith by praying towards Mecca every day.

The New York City School Chancellor’s regulations provide time off for religious observance with few exceptions; none of these applied to this case. And the New York City Human Rights Law offers more protection to observe Holy Days of Obligation than does the federal law. On May 26, Bill Donohue wrote to Schools Chancellor Joel Klein demanding that this issue be investigated immediately so that appropriate remedies could be pursued.

On July 31, after two months of no response from Klein’s office, Donohue wrote to Patricia Gatling, president of the New York City Commission on Human Rights, asking her to look into this issue. Donohue noted that the action taken by the principal not only violated the Chancellor’s regulations, but also the New York City Human Rights Law addressing unlawful discriminatory practices regarding employment and religious observance.

On August 10, Donohue received a letter from Michael Best, General Counsel for the New York City Department of Education. In the letter, Best offered no suitable explanation to the league and only noted that if the teachers wished to challenge the denial, they could take it up with UFT.

June 13
Los Angeles, CA – A graduating student at UCLA was allowed to thank Jesus in a statement at the school’s commencement ceremony after originally being told that she wouldn’t be allowed. A faculty advisor told the student that she must refer to “God” rather than “Jesus” because the name of “Jesus” might offend some people.

July 22
New York, NY – Dr. Thio Li-ann, a Christian professor at the National University of Singapore, withdrew her interest in teaching at New York University Law School for the fall semester. She withdrew after it was discovered that in 2007, as a Singaporean lawmaker, she opposed a repeal of the law proscribing homosexual acts.

On July 23, NYU’s law school dean, Richard Revesz, issued a statement flipping the issue of intimidation on Professor Thio. He blamed her for creating “an unwelcoming atmosphere.” Revesz also said that Thio replied to her critics “in a manner that many member [sic] of our community—[himself] included—consider offensive and hurtful.”

That same day, Bill Donohue e-mailed and wrote to Revesz asking him to identify a single sentence that was at all untoward. On August 6, Donohue received an e-mail from Revesz stating, “I welcome differing viewpoints and appreciate hearing from you [Donohue].” In the e-mail, Revesz failed to identify Thio’s comments that were “offensive and hurtful.” The best he could do was to say “comments were made [by Thio] that were viewed as offensive by those with opposing viewpoints.”

September 8
San Francisco, CA – The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a school’s refusal to let a band play a religious song at a high school graduation ceremony. The court ruled that it wasn’t forbidding religious music at the graduation, but that it was reasonable for the school officials to “prohibit the playing of an obviously religious piece.” The song in question was Franz Beibl’s “Ave Maria.”

September 14
Philadelphia, PA – An attorney for the Thomas More Law Center argued before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals seeking to reverse a New Jersey school ban on religious music in public schools. The suit alleged that the ban is an impermissible government-sponsored message of disapproval of and hostility towards religion.

September 28
Catoosa County, TN – Cheerleaders from Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School were banned from creating banners that displayed Bible verses after the school superintendent received a complaint about them. The school spokeswoman said the banners would be prohibited because they violated the First Amendment. To show its support for the cheerleaders, the local community held a rally.

October 26
State College, PA – A white t-shirt, with a blue line down the middle and the words “Penn State White Out” across the chest, received complaints, including one from the ADL’s Philadelphia branch; the reason for the complaint, they claimed, is that the design resembled a cross. University Relations said that the design was based on the single stripe on the team’s football helmets and would not be pulled from the shelves.

University of Georgia Hate Mail Response

The following comments were found on the website of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution following our victory over the University of Georgia. All comments appear in their original form:

• “Catholics are idiots. My neighbors are Catholic, they moved in 4 years ago and now have 3 kids…the wife does not work and the husband drives a 15 year old POS Honda; and they ‘can’t afford’ to eat dinner out with my wife and I. If you can not afford a $50 dinner, THEN STOP HAVING KIDS! How the hell do they plan to pay for college? The Pope must be a real turd to hang out with.”

• “Who cares what the Catholic League thinks. Mr. Donohue’s analogy is absurd. The catholics and other christians were burning temples and mosques and killing people who believed differently long before some fanatical Islamic groups adopted that approach.”

• “Bill Donahue is a tool of the conservative media and should be ridiculed and condemned on a daily basis.”

• “Bill Donohue and the catholic league are a bunch of PC bullies who go around trying to silence anyone they fell ‘offends’ them, and it seems everyone offends them! What doesn’t upset the catholic league now a days… Oh yea, holocaust deniers.”

• “Who gives a rats azz what a bunch of Catholics think? They are nothing more than a herd of self righteous baby factories. I’ll bet they are patting themselves on the back with the good job done by that brood sow Octo-mom in California. When they are not molesting alter boys they are wagging their finger at everyone else for what is ‘sinful’ in their lives. Catholics are a dying breed and soon to be extinct.”

• “Unprotected sex is fantastic! It creates unwanted children, spreads disease, and feels soooo good! Who needs a condom? If the Catholic Church had their way, condoms would be illegal in all countries of the world. Viva AIDS!”

• “The planet would be a much nicer place if all religions would keep their beliefs to themselves!”

• “All religions are cults and all religious people are cult followers; they are indoctrinated lemmings who form their core beliefs not around reason and evidence, but around irrational fabrications that less educated people told them to believe. Birth control/STD protection is good, and if advertising it angers a group of indoctrinated fools, all the better.”

• “Rome has already taken over the University of Virginia, founded by Thomas Jefferson. No doubt UGA and every other major college and university is targeted by Rome for takeover – as is the U.S. by their promotion of illegal immigration – that America ‘forget,’ and be ‘untaught’ who we are as an ‘exceptional’ sovereign nation.”

• “We came here to escape the Old Sectarian Order of king and pope and established, throughout Our Whig Founders, The New Secular Order – Novus Order Seclorem – and made it a part of Our Creed. Whig means ‘Anti-Roman Catholic and Our Founder, Author of the Declaration of American Independence, Thomas Jefferson, recognized Rome as ‘the real Anti-Christ,’ with full substantiation for all true American to read and know. Promoted by Rome, pushed to emigrate to America by design, just as Rome is pushing illegals here now. Roman Catholics won the Civil War, then killed Lincoln six days after Appomattox because he wanted to let the south up easy.  Since then they have taken over Big Oil and implemented the Federal Reserve Bank; financed the rise of Hitler, and the Holocaust; formented the Red Scare to evade accountability for Hitler and Nazism; killed John and Martin to keep us dying in their slave plantation of Vietnam, ran Iron Contra through their altarboy Ollie North to keep their Central American hegemony intact against encroaching Protestantism; promote Organized Crime; Waco to shut up the Seventh Day Adventists’ explaining on their own radio station how Rome had taken over Washington; cheated into office a draft-dodger (Hitler’s banker’s grandson and the son of one of JFK’s assassins) to commit 9/11 for Big Oil, to restart Afghan opium trade, and the Saudis- who teamed up with the Vatican-banker Rockefellers a hundred years ago; and the unconstitutional money system now faltering…and any Georgian or American is going to give a good G-ddam* about what the frontman for the pedophile priesthood and the Anti-Christ’s ‘Black Aristocracy’ has to say? Someone get a hook for the Anti-Christ…the Pit awaits…and ropes for the necks of the traitors who serve it. It’s ‘them’ or ‘us.’ Pick sides and let’s get down to business of being American. ”

• “Rome and Donohue…and any who serve up their children to the proven pedophile priesthood, and support illegal immigration to take over Our Country, have zero moral authority…zero, zilch, nada.”

• “I am a Baptist, Southern Baptist to be exact and I have to say I see nothing wrong with the sex posters. The Catholics need to get a life and learn to use sexual protection lol.”

• “What the hell does the extremist reaction by followers of the ‘peaceful’ religion of Islam have to do with this poster?”

• “The Catholic Church did more to persecute and divide the world throughout history that any other ‘publicly accepted’ entity and should hold its place in history next to Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin”

• “What’s wrong with this world…the Catholic Church can molest our young children, get away with it, then speak out about a condom that helps to prevent the spread of STD’s?”

• “Hell hath no fury like that of the Holy See scorned by the abominable use of the artistry from one of the Vatican and history’s most cherished homosexual artists!”

• “This is a PUBLIC STATE University! It’s completely appropriate for student services to educate and advertise about sexual health. There are 33,831 students currently enrolled here. Many of them are doing it!!! It’s 2009! Modernize or dissolve, Catholic Church!”

• “Jefferson called it The Bible…and the ‘New Testament’…making a clear and obvious distinction between the Original, and the ‘book’ for ‘Replacement Theology,’ created by Rome’s elite as a tool against the Jews. Viz: crucifixion was the one, specific and unique punishment for only one crime under the codified Roman law: the second conviction for sedition. Tens of thousands were crucified by Rome. Denying the divinity of caesar was considered sedition. The first conviction for the offense garnered a certain number of lashes with a whip-of-cords…. Read ‘A Moral Reckoning,’ by the author of ‘Hitler’s Willing Executioners,’ Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, to know with complete certainty that two popes and the Roman Catholic Church are ‘morally, ethically, and legally culpable of the Holocaust.’”

• “You mean to tell me that the Catholic League is more worried about a Poster and not the serious issue of Catholic priest’s molesting kids? Sounds like a lot of double standards to me.”

• “Most of you get WAAAAYYYY too upset over this religious thing. Believe what you want, as fervently as you want, but do not push it or demand it of others.”

January 23
Bills were introduced in both houses of the Maryland legislature—sponsored by Delores Goodwin Kelley in the Senate and C. Sue Hecht in the House—that would have continued the duplicitous way private and public institutions are treated.

These bills continued the outrageous insulation afforded public schools: under the law, claims are limited to $100,000 in damages and alleged victims must give notice of a suit within six months. No such cap is awarded to private institutions. In other words, both of these bills would have ratified a dual system of justice.

Sen. Kelley denied that her bill targeted the Catholic Church, and conceded that priests account for “less than two percent of the perpetrators.” Likewise, Delegate Hecht admitted that priests account for “a miniscule number” of offenses. That being the case, it suggests that the real damage is being done elsewhere. And since we know that the sexual abuse of minors is 100 times greater in the public schools than in the Catholic Church, the law should have included public schools as well.

We issued a news release calling out Kelley and Hecht for their duplicity and asked our members to contact Sen. Kelley. In our release we said: “Imagine, for just one moment, what the reaction would be if a law were proposed that would severely penalize public school teachers for sexual abuse but would give a slap on the wrist to Catholic teachers for the same offense. And imagine what would happen if there were a cap on the amount of damages a victim could extract from Catholic schools, but the public schools could be squeezed for millions.”

Within 24 hours of our news release addressing this situation, we received the news that Kelley’s bill did not make it out of committee, thus rendering it dead.

February 2
We filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Association of Christian Schools International, et al. v. Roman Stearns, et al. We supported students who are being denied credit by the University of California for high school courses in which religious viewpoints are discussed.

Drafted by the American Center for Law and Justice, the brief argued that this discrimination is a violation of the First Amendment because it demonstrates hostility toward religion. The state’s action was unjustified because the school system cannot establish that the courses in question cause the students to be any less prepared for college level work.

The brief further contended that such discrimination, in excluding students who have studied such courses, defeats the university system’s goal of diversity. Finally, there is no case law to support these actions, which do not further a compelling state interest.

The categories of courses that were disfavored include those that primarily address one religion, particularly Christianity; those that state God has influenced and directed human history; courses that address morality, ethics and social justice from a religious viewpoint; courses that address religious elements in a non-religious subject matter; and courses that address religious viewpoints only in one section of the course.

Our brief cites numerous examples of rejected courses. Here are some brief descriptions:

• A “History of Christianity” class was rejected even though it not only addressed Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox viewpoints, but also the Jewish roots of Christianity and the impact of Islam in the Middle Ages.

• A “World History” course was rejected because it presupposed a Christian God created and governed the world.

• A class called “Moral Theology: Introduction to Ethics” was rejected for addressing ethics from a Catholic perspective even though it also examined many other ethical viewpoints, such as those of the Greeks, Buddhists, Muslims and indigenous peoples.

• A “Women’s Studies” class with readings that included Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique, Anita Diamant’s The Red Tent and Ada Maria Isasi-Diaz’s Hispanic Women: Prophetic Voice in the Church was rejected because some of the readings had a Catholic viewpoint.

March – July
Two Connecticut lawmakers sought to effectively take control of the Catholic Church in their state. Because Bridgeport Bishop William Lori, Hartford Archbishop Henry Mansell, the Connecticut Catholic Conference, the Catholic League, and thousands of Catholics all over the state fought back, the bill was quickly pulled. It proved to be a giant victory for Catholics loyal to the Magisterium and to the First Amendment provisions on religious liberty.

Bill #1098 was introduced in the Connecticut legislature by Rep. Michael Lawlor and Sen. Andrew McDonald, both Democrats. Its express purpose was “To revise the corporate governance provisions applicable to the Roman Catholic Church and provide for the investigation of the misappropriation of funds by religious corporations.”

The bill specified that each parish was to elect a board of directors to run all parish functions, thus stripping the pastor of his authority. As the Hartford Courant said, the bill “would take administrative and fiscal power away from priests and bishops and give it to parishioners.” Moreover, it would only apply to the Catholic Church.

It was introduced on Thursday, March 5; the public did not know about it until the following day. Hearings were scheduled for Wednesday, March 11. In other words, stealth-like tactics were used to slip the bill in with minimum input from Catholics.

The Catholic League was contacted by members from all over the state. By the time the staff arrived at work on Monday, March 9, it was deluged with phone calls, e-mails and faxes from Catholics, as well as non-Catholics, from every part of Connecticut.

Bishop Lori and Archbishop Mansell implored Catholics to attend the public hearing. They announced that there would be buses galore to take Catholic students, teachers, parents, priests, and nuns—anyone who wanted to go—to the event.

On March 9, Bill Donohue released a statement to the media saying, “More than that needs to be done.” He said, “Bishop Lori is correct to say that the bill ‘is a thinly-veiled attempt to silence the Catholic Church on the important issues of the day, such as same-sex marriage.’ Indeed, it is payback: this brutal act of revenge by Lawlor and McDonald, two champions of gay marriage, is designed to muzzle the voice of the Catholic Church.”

Because the Catholic Church was singled out, Donohue charged, “Lawlor and McDonald have demonstrated that they are ethically unfit to continue as lawmakers. They have evinced a bias so strong, and so malicious, that it compromises their ability to serve the public good.”

Donohue then called for their expulsion from the state legislature. “They should therefore be expelled by their colleagues. Reprimand and censure suggest that the offender can be rehabilitated. It is painfully obvious in this instance that neither lawmaker is prepared to accept such a sanction. Expulsion is the only rational response. We are contacting House leader Christopher Donovan and Senate leader Martin Looney to explore this action.”

Very quickly, we heard from lawmakers on our side. A unanimous vote against the bill was delivered by Republican legislators. It was evident that our side had struck back so hard that the two Democratic lawmakers, and their supporters, were taken aback.

On Tuesday, March 10, the day before the scheduled hearing, McDonald and Lawlor pulled their bill. They said they did so at the behest of Tom Gallagher—a contributor to the National Catholic Reporter—the person who proposed the takeover.

When the bill was withdrawn, Donohue released another statement: “Every pre-law undergraduate knows what Lawlor and McDonald tried to pull off—in stealth fashion—was flagrantly unconstitutional. For their fascist stunt, they should at least be censured by their colleagues. Ideally, they should resign or be forced out of office.”

After information was revealed about the bill being pulled, those who sought a state takeover refused to apologize. In fact, Paul Lakeland, who is chairman of the Catholic Studies Department at Fairfield University, a Jesuit institution, said the bill did not violate the First Amendment because the bishops still had control over doctrinal matters. Then the Hartford Courant chimed in saying in an editorial that McDonald and Lawlor “were trying to help rank-and-file Catholics.”

But few Catholics, or non-Catholics for that matter, were fooled by Lakeland and the Hartford Courant.

In May, the Connecticut Office of State Ethics sought to penalize the Diocese of Bridgeport for the rally. These officials accused the diocese of breaking the state’s lobbying laws. On May 29, Bishop Lori filed suit seeking an injunction to stop punitive measures from being implemented.

Earlier in the month, there had been a rally in Hartford demanding universal health care. According to the Courant, approximately 140 “clergy and religious folks marched to the state Capitol…. And all chanted and carried signs that said, ‘Muslims for Health Care,’ and ‘Health Care for All.’” But this rally occasioned no threats from state officials.

We urged our members to contact Carol Carson, the executive director of the ethics office, and ask that she call off the investigation. On June 30, we were joined by Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who also called for an end to the investigation. On July 1, the office withdrew its probe.

March – June
A bill was introduced in the New York State Assembly by Assemblywoman Margaret Markey, which would have had grave implications if passed.

According to the bill, an 18-year-old who was allegedly raped by a public school teacher would have a 90-day period to file a claim for an offense that happened in a public institution. But a student who was allegedly raped in a Catholic school during the JFK presidency could bring suit (for one year, there is no time limit on claims affecting private institutions). After a year, a student from a Catholic or Jewish school would still have ten more years to file a claim than a victim from the public schools (the current five year period to file a claim would be expanded to ten years).

Another bill was introduced in the Assembly, by Assemblyman Vito Lopez, which would not discriminate on the basis of location. Eric Schneiderman, chairman of the Senate Codes Committee, said that the glaring disparity might be addressed in future legislation. Schneiderman said, “Just because it [the Markey bill] does not broaden the rights of victims 100 percent does not mean we should not try to broaden their rights somewhat.” His argument collapsed, of course, when considering the Lopez bill: it would cover 100 percent of the victims.

In response to the disparity in the Markey bill, Bill Donohue wrote an open letter to New York State lawmakers. The following is the text of his letter:

“Complaints have reached my office about some New York State lawmakers who are considering a bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Margaret Markey, that would discriminate against the Catholic Church by selectively targeting private institutions in legislation aimed at prosecuting the sexual abuse of minors. There is another bill on the same issue, sponsored by Assemblyman Vito Lopez, which does not discriminate: it treats private and public institutions the same way. While there are some differences between the two bills, the central difference is in their application.

“Please understand that I am not accusing anyone who supports the Markey bill of anti-Catholicism. But I hasten to add that those who do so are certainly giving the appearance of sponsoring bigotry. Perception, it is often said, is reality.

“Alabama Governor George Wallace was known for promoting a dual system of justice—one for whites and one for blacks. It is no less invidious to promote a dual system of justice based on other grounds. If a child has been violated, what matters is the crime, not the location.

“Anyone who is really serious about prosecuting the sexual abuse of minors wants all victimizers to be treated equally. I hope you agree.”

On March 24, the National Catholic Register ran a story on its blog about the bill. “In a detailed statement responding to criticisms of the bill,” the story said, “Markey said that public schools have handled abuse cases well in recent years, whereas the Catholic hierarchy ‘has relied on secrecy, quiet transfers and threats to hide abusers when the threat of public disclosure emerges.’” When the Catholic League asked Markey’s office for a copy of her statement, we were told by staff member Rosemary Lategano that the story was wrong and there was no such statement. We then called the newspaper and obtained a copy of it.

Donohue commented on this saying:

“Was Markey’s office in error? Or were we lied to? One thing is for sure: Markey is wrong about the facts. She says the public schools have shown ‘increasing sensitivity’ to cases of child sexual abuse, and that they ‘routinely move swiftly to respond to allegations against employees.’

“In 2007, the AP did a major report on this subject. It concluded that child sexual abuse in the public schools was ‘a widespread problem,’ saying there was ‘a deeply entrenched resistance toward recognizing and fighting abuse.’ Moreover, offending teachers are moved from one school district to another so often that they are called ‘mobile molesters.’

“Two years earlier, author and educator John Seryak concluded that ‘The problem in education dwarfs the Catholic Church problem.’ And a year earlier, Dr. Charol Shakeshaft, the nation’s leading authority on the issue, estimated that ‘the physical abuse of students in schools is likely more than 100 times the abuse of priests.’ So common is the transfer of offending teachers that it is called ‘passing the trash.’

“Markey’s bill is based on faulty assumptions and erroneous data. It also unfairly discriminates between Catholic schools and public schools. And her office staff is either incompetent or devious.”

In the April 22 Newsday, Rev. Anthony Evans, president of the National Black Church Initiative, blamed the Catholic Church for opposing Markey’s bill. The day before, State Senator Thomas Duane explained why he was in favor of the bill. When we saw these two statements we decided to ask Sen. Duane to introduce a bill that would reverse the rules and give those who were abused in a Catholic school 90 days to file a claim and put no time limit on those abused in a public school. We said that this would make more sense considering most of the abuse has taken place in the public schools.

To our surprise, on April 26 Newsday endorsed—with modification—the Lopez bill. The newspaper called Markey’s proposed legislation an “ill-advised” bill that would “set a dangerous precedent of allowing the emotions of the times to target a specific group or religion.” Although we were surprised by the endorsement, we appreciated Newsday’s support. Bill Donohue wrote in a published letter to the editor: “The shame of it is that the Markey bill’s inherent bias is still not seen by every reasonable person as an outrage. Thanks to Newsday, the mask is coming off.”

We weren’t only surprised by Newsday, but support for Lopez’s bill also grew in the Orthodox Jewish community as well as with Gov. David Paterson.

When Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio vigorously opposed Markey’s legislation and favored that of Lopez, Markey retaliated against the bishop. She accused DiMarzio of being “on the borderline of jeopardizing his not-for-profit status.” She also warned, “If I were the bishop, I would walk very cautiously.” After we hit Markey for her comments about DiMarzio, Markey decided to amend her bill allowing public schools to be sued as well. However, the amendment was still problematic; it still suspended the statute of limitations for one year, thus permitting anyone to file a claim regardless when the alleged abuse occurred. We followed up by pledging that if Markey’s bill prevailed, we would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in a massive campaign to alert those who had been sexually abused by a public school employee that they had a year to sue the schools, provided that they met the provisions in the bill.

A few days after she amended her bill, Markey chopped it up again, stating that anyone who wished to file a suit during the suspension of the statute of limitations could do so provided that he is not over the age of 53. Finally on June 23, the bill appeared to be dead in the water.

Although the bill stalled, we declared that we would never yield on our pledge. If Markey’s bill ever passes, we will do whatever it takes to alert those victimized by public school employees of their right to sue.

March 31
President Barack Obama nominated Dawn Johnsen to be assistant attorney general in charge of the Office of Legal Counsel. In the late 1980s, Johnsen worked on a lawsuit, United States Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, which sought to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status. Johnsen also helped write the Freedom of Choice Act, a law so draconian that, if enacted, it would force Catholic hospitals to start performing abortions or have their funding pulled.

Johnsen is not merely pro-abortion—she celebrates it. To wit: she testified in February 2009 that after a woman has her child aborted, “The experience is no longer traumatic; the response of most women to the experience is relief.” April 2 An amendment that would have protected conscience rights of healthcare providers was defeated in the U.S. Senate. The amendment was proposed in light of the Obama administration’s plans to rescind the rule that was issued the previous December by the Department of Health and Human Services that protected the conscience rights of healthcare workers.

April 10
San Diego, CA – On Good Friday a pastor and his wife were informed by an employee of San Diego County that the couple was in violation of county code for hosting a Bible study in their home; the county official told them that the Bible study was a religious assembly. A few days later the couple received a written warning that cited “unlawful use of land,” and ordered them to either “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit” which could cost the family thousands of dollars.

April – May
On April 6, President Barack Obama appointed anti-Catholic bigot Harry Knox to serve on the Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Knox, the director of the religion and faith program at the Human Rights Campaign, called on Pope Benedict XVI to “start telling the truth about condom use,” in response to the pope’s comments that the promiscuous distribution of condoms coincides with an increase in HIV/AIDS; Knox also holds the Holy Father responsible for “endangering people’s lives.” He further called the Knights of Columbus “foot soldiers of a discredited army of oppression” because of their opposition to gay marriage.

Because of comments like these, Indiana Congressman Mike Pence called on Obama to withdraw Knox’s appointment and to “select a person who can serve the faith-based community with the respect and dignity it deserves.”

On May 13, Bill Donohue participated in a teleconference with other Catholic leaders demanding the ouster of Knox from the Council. A letter signed by some two-dozen Catholic leaders called on Obama to dump Knox.

Knox had plenty of opportunities to take back his hate speech against the pope and orthodox Catholics, but refused to do so.

When questioned about Knox’s appointment, Democratic leaders like Nancy Pelosi and White House spokesman Robert Gibbs professed ignorance of his anti-Catholic record.

If all Knox had done was criticize the Catholic Church on public policy issues, there would have been no problem. But he was not content to disagree: he demonized the opposition. Moreover, football coach Tony Dungy was pressured to decline an invitation to serve on the same board, simply because he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman.

We said justice demanded that Knox be removed.

April 14
Washington, DC – When President Barack Obama spoke at Georgetown University, the White House requested that all religious symbols and signage that might appear as a backdrop to where the president was to speak be covered up. Georgetown acceded to the request and made sure that the symbol “IHS,” a monogram of the name of Jesus Christ, was not in sight. A Georgetown official said the initial backdrop “wasn’t high enough by itself to fully cover the IHS and cross above the GU seal and it seemed most respectful to have them covered so as not to be seen out of context.”

Following the president’s Georgetown speech, the Catholic Left organization Catholic Democrats flagged the story on the homepage of its website. Although the group covered Obama’s speech, it never once mentioned that the White House requested to cover up Catholic iconography. Instead, the group praised his speech.

April 22
The House Judiciary Committee marked-up a hate crimes bill sponsored by Rep. John Conyers. Serious questions were raised by religious leaders about this legislation, especially as it pertained to religious pronouncements against homosexuality. There were also concerns with the legislation regarding its language protecting pedophiles.

When this bill was being considered in 2007, Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas asked Alabama Rep. Art Davis (his amendment is in the bill) the following question: “If a minister preaches that sexual relations outside of marriage of a man and a woman is wrong, and somebody within that congregation goes out and does an act of violence, and that person says that that minister counseled or induced him through the sermon to commit that act, are you saying under your amendment that in no way could that ever be introduced against the minister?” Davis, who supported the bill, replied, “No.”

Bill Donohue addressed the media, “The problem in general with hate crimes legislation is that it invites the government to probe way beyond motive. And in instances like this, it trespasses on free speech and religious liberty. This is a road no defender of liberty should ever want to go down.”

The bill—championed by gay rights and liberal groups—also included pedophiles under the rubric of sexual orientation. This was the ultimate confession: liberal Democrats think of pedophiles as indistinguishable from homosexuals.

When this subject came before the House Judiciary Committee, an amendment to the hate crimes bill that would have excluded pedophilia from the definition of sexual orientation was defeated by Democrats along party lines, 13-10.

The debate was over: for liberals, child molesters should be given the same rights as homosexuals. Moreover, they should be given more rights than pregnant women and veterans; the latter two categories were explicitly denied coverage under the hate crimes bill. Even worse, an amendment that would bar prosecution based in whole or in part on religious beliefs quoted from the Bible, the Tanakh (Judaism’s sacred book) or the Koran was defeated by Democrats along party lines, 11-8. In other words, religious speech would be denied First Amendment protection. A week after the bill was introduced, it passed the House.

June – December
San Francisco, CA – On June 3, three members of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors did not violate the First Amendment for its 2006 resolution condemning the Catholic Church for “meddling” in its affairs because of the Church’s opposition to gay adoptions. The anti-Catholic resolution proclaims the Church’s moral teaching and beliefs on homosexuality as “insulting to all San Franciscans,” “hateful,” and “absolutely unacceptable,” among other things.

On November 5, the full federal appeals court ruled to put that decision aside, holding that the case should be decided by an eleven-judge panel for rehearing. This was good news and we are hopeful that upon a full hearing, our position will be vindicated.

On December 16, the eleven-member panel heard oral arguments from the attorneys representing the Catholic League. The Thomas More Law Center lawyers again made the case that the 2006 resolution was unconstitutional because it created a hostile environment for Catholics and the Catholic Church in San Francisco.

August 5-12
Charlotte, NC – On August 5, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) accused Belmont Abbey College, a Catholic institution, of discriminating against female employees by not covering contraceptives in its health insurance plan.

After employees filed complaints with the EEOC, it told the school in March that it would close the file on the discrimination charge, as it had not found the school’s decision to be discriminatory.

On August 12, Bill Donohue wrote to Ruben Daniels Jr., the director of EEOC-Charlotte:

“Dr. William Thierfelder, president of Belmont Abbey College, was notified in March that an investigation by your office of alleged wrongdoing was closed. At issue was the right of a Catholic college not to provide coverage for abortion, artificial contraception and voluntary sterilization. Now he has been informed that the case has been reopened.

“Would you please submit to me all documentation, including e-mails, office memos, and the like, that are relevant to this reversal? For example, if an error in judgment was initially made, it is important to know what it was and who made it. It is also vitally important to know the exact reasons why this case has been resurrected, and whose decision it was.

“I am not pointing fingers, just doing my job. And that job is to combat discrimination against Catholics and defamation against the institutional Church. As you know, the First Amendment insulates religious decision-making from the purview of state authorities in most instances. If it is your position that the First Amendment is not operative in this case, I would appreciate knowing why.

“This issue arises at a time when millions of Catholics, led by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, are gravely concerned about religious rights being jeopardized under new health care bills. It is important, therefore, that you allay our concerns by providing evidence that there is no animus against Belmont Abbey, a Catholic institution.”

In addition to sending the letter to the EEOC, we sent a news release detailing what was going on to every bishop in the nation.

After this letter appeared in Catalyst, Belmont Abbey acquired the legal services of the Becket Fund, an excellent law firm in Washington, D.C. After we found out that the school would be represented by the Becket Fund, we were confident that justice would be served.

August 26
Frankfort, KY – A judge declared a reference to God in a 2006 law creating a Kentucky Department of Homeland Security unconstitutional. By requiring the office to acknowledge “the dependence on Almighty God” as vital for Kentucky’s security, the judge declared that the General Assembly was creating an official government position on religion. American Atheists, along with ten Kentucky residents, filed the lawsuit in 2008.

September 17
Pensacola, FL – Two school officials were tried in federal court for praying in the presence of students. Over 60 members of the U.S. House voiced their support for the educators and denounced what they called a “criminalization of prayer.” The officials were accused of breaching the conditions of a lawsuit settlement reached with the ACLU.

At the end of the trial, the federal judge found the teachers not guilty.

September 23
We commented on Kevin Jennings, the man Barack Obama selected to be the Director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools.

Jennings, raised a Baptist by his minister father and non-believing, anti-Catholic mother, is known for lecturing the Catholic Church about its teachings on sexuality. He has also railed against the “hard core bigots” whom he says make up the “religious right.”

Jennings’ hatred of religion began at the age of 17, right after he masturbated at the thought of watching two “hot guys” take off their shirts in his home. We know this because this is exactly what he wrote in his book, Mama’s Boy, Preacher’s Son: A Memoir.

Following his masturbatory experience, Jennings revealed what happened next: “I developed a new attitude toward God as a result. Before, I was the one who was failing God; now I decided He was the one who had failed me.” Continuing, he wrote, “I decided I had done nothing wrong: He had, by promising to ‘set you free’ and never delivering on His promise. What had He done for me, other than make me feel shame and guilt? Squat. Screw you, buddy—I don’t need you around anymore, I decided.” (His italics.) He ends by saying that for many years he “reacted violently to anyone who professed any kind of religion.”

We later found out that Jennings is a member of ACT UP, the homosexual urban terrorist group that broke into St. Patrick’s Cathedral in 1989 and disrupted Mass, desecrating the Eucharist and posted obscene depictions of Cardinal O’Connor. Jennings also was listed as a donor to the display, “ACT UP New York: Activism, Art, and the AIDS Crisis, 1987-1993,” which was featured at Harvard University in 2009.

October 8
We drew attention to President Obama’s nominee to join the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the anti-religious Chai Feldblum.

Feldblum is such a radical activist that she wants to subordinate a constitutional right, namely freedom of religion, to a right that she invented, namely sexual liberty. Moreover, she has lobbied for “a new vision for securing governmental and private institutional recognition of diverse kinds of partnerships….” (Our emphasis.) This includes, “Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households.” She also wants “Separation of church and state in all matters, including regulation and recognition of relationships, households and families.” Read: she wants to privatize marriage and provide equal status to every conceivable “partnership.”

October 23
Warren, MI – The Thomas More law Center filed a federal lawsuit against the Macomb County Road Commission due to its denial of a permit to a citizen wishing to display a crèche on a public median. The crèche had been displayed at the same location since 1945 but had to be removed in December of 2008 because of the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s claim that the display was a violation of the separation of church and state. When the citizen applied for a permit in 2009, he was denied on the grounds that the creche “clearly displays a religious message” and violates “separation of church and state.”

October 27 – November 2
Frankfort, KY – Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear’s administration noted that the Christmas Tree on the State Capitol lawn would not be called a “Christmas Tree,” but rather a “Holiday Tree.” The official line stated that the “Holiday Tree” was inclusive of Thanksgiving, Christmas, Hanukkah and New Year’s. After being inundated with complaints from angry Christians, Beshear reversed his position and noted that the tree would rightfully be called the Christmas Tree.

November 2
Amelia, OH – The Christmas parade that had been held for 28 years was changed to the “Holiday Parade” due to fears that the village could be sued for including the word Christmas. After churches in the village declared that they would boycott the parade, it was decided that the parade would be canceled. Due to public outcry, the Christmas parade was subsequently held.

November 11
A federal judge ruled that South Carolina’s “I Believe” license plates were unconstitutional because they violate the First Amendment establishment clause. The license plates featured an image of a cross in front of a stained glass window with the inscription “I Believe.”

November 23
Baltimore, MD – In a clear shot at the efforts of the Church, the Baltimore City Council approved a measure that demanded crisis pregnancy centers in the city display signs stating that they do not provide abortions or birth control referrals.

The Archdiocese of Baltimore, which donates more than $100,000 to crisis pregnancy centers, opposed the measure, calling it “harassment.” Archbishop Edwin O’Brien called out the council for singling out pro-life centers and noted that the bill did not “seek to fine abortion clinics for not posting a list of services they do not provide (e.g., parenting classes, maternity and infant clothes, formula).” The Maryland Right to Life’s legislative director also noted, “This is the first time in the United States that any elected body has chosen to vote to condemn pregnancy centers…. Baltimore has just said, ‘We recognize you do great work, but politically we’re going to regulate you anyway.’”

Health Care Bill
HEALTH CARE POLITICS: ABORTION ISSUE BOILS OVER

It seldom happens that one issue dominates an entire season, but during the summer the debate over health care commanded everyone’s attention. It wouldn’t have occasioned the interest of the Catholic League had it not been for the life issues. But when abortion and lack of protection of the conscience rights for health care workers are included in the legislation, it’s enough to draw us to the table; “end-of-life” issues were originally in the Senate bill.

Two weeks into the Obama administration, a Gallup poll reported that the president received high marks from the public on most issues. The one glaring exception was abortion: only 35 percent agreed with him on allowing funding of abortions overseas. It was then revealed in another survey that a majority of Americans now consider themselves pro-life. When we went to press for the September Catalyst, the president still hadn’t asked his party members in Congress to exclude abortion from the health care bills.

It is no secret that this is the most radical pro-abortion administration in American history. The number of former employees of Planned Parenthood, NARAL and EMILY’s List is astounding. So extreme is the president and his staff on this issue that they were apparently willing to sink health care reform before ever excluding abortion from the final bill.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, a strong advocate of universal health care, was so troubled by the prospect of a health care bill that funds abortion that it pulled its support. By doing so, it stood on principle. Justin Cardinal Rigali and Bishop William Murphy provided the leadership.

It was hard to listen to those who support the bills make the claim that abortion is nowhere mentioned in them. True but phony: it is precisely because abortion is seen as a medical procedure that it is automatically included in these health care bills, unless otherwise noted. This explained why the pro-abortion industry was delighted with them. Want further proof? Rep. Bart Stupak, Rep. Joe Pitts, Rep. Eric Cantor, Rep. Sam Johnson, Senator Mike Enzi and Senator Orrin Hatch all specifically introduced legislation that would bar abortion funding from these bills. And guess what? They all lost.

As the September issue of Catalyst documented, the Catholic League spent a good part of the summer seeking to educate the public, especially Catholics, about the details. We pointed out, for example, that when the White House posted a “Reality Check” on these bills, and sought to debunk many of the reasons why its opponents were wrong, it never tried to convince the public that abortion wasn’t included in the bills.

ABORTION HAUNTS HEALTH CARE REFORM

Over the last several months of 2009, we were jolted by the inconsistencies of the Obama administration regarding abortion in the health care bills. In the SeptemberCatalyst, we noted that we were skeptical of the president’s intention to exclude abortion funding in the health care bill. Later on, we decided to give him the benefit of the doubt following his address to Congress stating that abortion would not be funded in the public option of the bill. Finally, we noted that President Obama had all of the information he needed to make the right decision to back an amendment that explicitly rejects abortion funding in the health care bill.

When Obama appeared on BlogTalkRadio to address health care reform he told the left-wing religious audience, “You’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion. Not true.” But we wondered why the House Committee on Ways and Means approved the America’s Health Choices Act (H.R. 3200) but voted down an amendment, sponsored by Rep. Eric Cantor, that would have barred “government funding of abortion.”

While addressing the audience, the president said that there “is a lot of misinformation” about this issue. But how could he say that knowing that an amendment specifically prohibiting abortion was defeated? Was he lying or was he misinformed?

When President Obama spoke to Congress about health care reform on September 9, we wondered if he would discuss abortion; to our surprise he did. We said that the rational thing for the president to do would be to drop abortion from the health care bills and support conscience rights for health care workers. Obama did nothing of the sort. Instead, he offered a one-sentence denial claiming that his health care proposal would not result in federal funding of abortion; that simply was not true.

Even the New York Times, which strongly endorsed his speech, said in a news analysis that his claim that there is no federal funding for abortion was “not so clear-cut.” Indeed, it said, “the public and private money would all go into the same pot, and the source of money for any single procedure is largely a technicality.”

We noted that the president was playing a shell game. He defended the public option in his speech and under that plan, the person in charge of deciding whether abortion coverage would be mandated is his Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, the pro-abortion former governor of Kansas who never saw an abortion bill that she didn’t like.

But Richard Doerflinger, a prominent voice for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on life issues, welcomed Obama’s pledge not to include abortion coverage in the health care reform bill. Doerflinger was joined by Sister Carol Keehan, the head of the Catholic Health Association.

On the other hand, people like Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life maintained that the president’s proclamations represent “bogus claims.” Also unconvinced were such organizations as the National Right to Life Committee and the Susan B. Anthony List, as well as pro-life congressmen like Rep. Chris Smith. Independent journalists like Dan Gilgoff were also wary of Obama’s commitment, asserting that “On abortion—and for the moment—the White House isn’t budging at all.”

This wasn’t a split between social justice Catholics and pro-life Catholics, or between secularists and people of faith. This was a divide within the pro-life Catholic community. All of the aforementioned are men and women of sincerity, and all of them are well informed. On closer inspection, the chasm isn’t as wide as it seemed. None of these leaders would support a bill that includes federal funding for abortion. The split came down to the issue of trust: Could we expect the president to deliver a health care bill that excludes public monies for abortion?

On September 13, it appeared that we had finally gotten the promise we were looking for. Kathleen Sebelius appeared on ABC with George Stephanopoulos and told him that President Obama was committed to signing a health care bill that excludes federal funding of abortion. Although both Obama and Sebelius are rabid supporters of abortion-on-demand, fairness dictated that we take them at their word.

Stephanopoulos asked, “So you are saying that he [the president] will go beyond what we have seen in the House and explicitly rule out any public funding for abortion?” Sebelius replied, “Well that’s exactly what the president said and that’s what he intends that the bill he signs will do.”

When Bill Donohue was asked by Ed Schultz on MSNBC whether the president was lying about abortion funding in the health care bill, Donohue said that if Obama was interpreted as saying that in H.R. 3200 there was no provision for abortion, then he was simply wrong. But Donohue gave the president the benefit of the doubt that he would put his imprimatur on a bill that excludes abortion funding.

We finally called for the president to back the amendment, drafted by Rep. Bart Stupak and Rep. Joe Pitts, that would bar abortion funding from H.R. 3200. We noted that neither President Obama nor Secretary Sebelius minced their words on this subject. This was a critical juncture—the time had come for the president to deliver on his pledge. The Catholic community anxiously awaited his next move.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD RIPS THE BISHOPS

In an article found on the Huffington Post, Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, said, “Seems that, if the U.S. Conference [of Catholic Bishops] had its way, the national health care system would make American women second-class citizens and deny them access to benefits they currently have.” And that’s just the danger she implied the bishops were doing in the United States. Abroad, she said that the bishops’ “hard-line opposition to women’s rights also endangers millions of women around the globe.” Of course she could not provide an example of why these bishops have not been locked up.

In 2009, Richards was summoned to the White House to discuss health care reform. Is this the type of advice she was given—to lash out at Catholic bishops? If not, she should have been reined in.

Richards was either ignorant or lying when she said, “comprehensive reproductive health care [is] supported by the majority of Americans.” In fact, nearly two in every three Americans (63 percent) favor laws preventing the use of taxpayer funds for abortions. But no matter, data never convince ideologues such as Richards.

It’s amazing that the American people were called fascists by U.S. Congressmen because they oppose the health care bills on the table, and Catholic bishops are told by one of the leading proponents of health care reform that they are a threat to human rights.

BISHOPS SPEAK OUT ON HEALTH CARE REFORM

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has been the leading advocate for universal health care for decades. While initially supportive of congressional efforts to pass health care reform, the bishops withdrew their support in light of abortion being funded under legislative proposals. In addition, conscience rights were not being protected. As the debate unfolded nationally, many bishops spoke up about the proposed health care reforms. Below is a selection of comments from bishops on this subject:

• Cardinal Justin F. Rigali of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia: “At a time when so much good will is being shown to create an equitable, affordable and just health care system in the United States, it would be tragic if this praiseworthy end were corrupted by including an immoral means, namely provisions for abortion. This would not be health care.”

• Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of the Archdiocese of Denver: “The whole meaning of ‘health care’ would be subverted by any plan that involves mandated abortion access or abortion funding. The reason is obvious. Killing or funding the killing of unborn children has nothing to do with promoting human health, and including these things in any ‘health care’ proposal, no matter how shrewdly hidden, would simply be a form of lying.”

• Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of the Archdiocese of Kansas City, KS and Bishop Robert W. Finn of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, MO: “Solidarity and the Promotion of the Common Good cause us to say that we cannot be passive concerning health care policy in our country. There is important work to be done, but ‘change’ for change’s sake; change which expands the reach of government beyond its competence would do more harm than good. Change which loses sight of man’s transcendent dignity or the irreplaceable value of human life; change which could diminish the role of those in need as agents of their own care is not truly human progress at all.”

• Bishop Paul S. Loverde of the Diocese of Arlington: “The truly vigilant realize that it is not reforming the health care system in itself that is wrong — in fact some reform is needed. Rather, it is the specific proposals included in that reform that could endanger the lives of the unborn, and the freedom of conscience of health care providers and citizens.”

• Bishop Samuel J. Aquila of the Diocese of Fargo: “In principle, the Church ought to always promote wider and more complete access to health care; however, that does not mean that in practice the Church ought to support each and every plan which is proposed by civil leaders.”

• Archbishop John C. Nienstedt of the Archdiocese of Minneapolis-St. Paul: “Reform is needed. But the underlying question remains: What kind of health care reform do we want? Given the vast range of ethical and moral issues involved, this legislation will manifest in a clear and even remarkable way what values we will hold or fail to uphold as a nation. In a very real way, this legislation will define our national character.”

• Bishop Blase J. Cupich of Diocese of Rapid City: “In the face of powerful pressures in a consumerist society, we should not overlook in this moment of health care reform the need to exercise moderation in a world of abundance. If we say that health care is a right rooted in our belief in human dignity, then we need to respect our own life and dignity by adopting lifestyles that enhance our health and well-being.”

• Bishop Thomas G. Doran of Diocese of Rockford, IL: “Our federal bureaucracy is a vast wasteland strewn with the carcasses of absurd federal programs which proved infinitely worse than the problems they were established to correct. It perhaps is too extreme to say that competent government is an oxymoron, but sometimes it seems that way. The moral principle of subsidiarity implies decreasing the role of government and employers in health care when lower order groups can better serve individuals and families. We need to think of health care as more of a market than a system.”

• Bishop Robert E. Guglielmone of Diocese of Charleston: “It is quite evident that there is much discussion in many quarters about the proposed health care reform bills in the houses of Congress. There are many issues that people throughout our country are concerned about, but there are some issues that are critical for us as Catholics and it is imperative that our voice be heard.”

• Bishop R. Walker Nickless of Diocese of Sioux City, IA: “First and most important, the Church will not accept any legislation that mandates coverage, public or private, for abortion, euthanasia, or embryonic stem-cell research. We refuse to be made complicit in these evils, which frankly contradict what ‘health care’ should mean. We refuse to allow our own parish, school, and diocesan health insurance plans to be forced to include these evils. As a corollary of this, we insist equally on adequate protection of individual rights of conscience for patients and health care providers not to be made complicit in these evils. A so-called reform that imposes these evils on us would be far worse than keeping the health care system we now have.”

DISHONESTY MARKS HEALTH CARE DEBATE

Sen. Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, was quoted in the October 1 New York Times commenting on allegations that abortion would be covered in the health care bill: “We are not changing current law.” Similarly, Sen. Olympia Snowe was quoted in the same newspaper saying, “We want to preserve the status quo on abortion.” Interestingly, the Times wrote an editorial that same day which called for total funding of abortion for any reason and at any time during pregnancy, but which also disagreed with what Baucus and Snowe said. Indeed, it explicitly said that Baucus achieved a “compromise” between full funding and no funding.

The following is a quote from the editorial: “Health plans could provide abortion coverage provided they used only premium money and co-payments contributed by beneficiaries and kept that money segregated from the subsidy. In every state, there would have to be at least one plan that covers abortions and one that does not.”

Thus, the New York Times showed how dishonest Baucus and Snowe were—existing public policy is not anything like that at either the federal or state level. But wait, the Times was also dishonest when it maintained that by some magical force monies raised from premiums can be “segregated” from the subsidy: money is fungible and that is why the United States bishops are right to call such schemes fiction.

The day before these stories appeared in the Times, Sen. Orrin Hatch introduced an amendment that essentially codified the status quo, namely it would ensure that the Hyde Amendment restrictions on federal funds for most abortions remained undisturbed in the proposed health care legislation. And who voted against the status quo? Baucus and Snowe. Consistent in their dishonesty, Baucus and Snowe also voted to kill conscience rights protections for health care workers, all the while maintaining that what they were doing was preserving the status quo. What they were really doing was preserving their place in the Abortion Hall of Shame.

DEMOCRATS ON COLLISION COURSE WITH CATHOLICS

Following the defeat of Sen. Orrin Hatch’s amendments that would have banned funding of abortion in the health care bill and ensured conscience rights protections for health care workers, we noted that the Democrats were on a collision course with Catholics.

The Democrats cannot expect Catholics to pay for child abuse in the womb without reprisal. Nor can they expect Catholics to sit back and watch while Catholic doctors and nurses are punished for failing to cooperate in evil.

More than any group in America, Catholic bishops have been at the forefront of the movement for universal health care. But they never signed on to a health care reform package that would make them violate their professed beliefs. Nor will they.

President Barack Obama had stated that he would not support a bill that provides funding for abortion or one that denies conscience rights for health care employees. But he made no public comment condemning the votes against these provisions, further fueling the concern of the nation’s Catholics that they have been lied to.

One thing we know for sure: If all along Obama had shown a fraction of the interest that he showed about winning over the Olympic Committee in bringing the games to Chicago, the Hatch amendments would have passed.

OBAMA BETRAYS THE BISHOPS

One big question that countless Catholics wondered in 2009 was: Is President Obama for or against abortion coverage in the health care bill? Late in the year, the guessing game was over.

On September 30, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops sent a letter to the U.S. Senate saying, “So far, the health reform bills considered in committee, including the new Senate Finance Committee bill, have not met President Obama’s challenge of barring use of federal dollars for abortion.”

We now know that President Obama—who lobbied to excise the abortion restrictions that the bishops wanted—betrayed the bishops.

Here is how New York Times reporter Robert Pear put it on November 10: “President Obama suggested Monday that he was not comfortable with abortion restrictions inserted into the House version of major health care legislation, and he prodded Congress to revise them.” Although Obama spoke out of both sides of his mouth in an ABC News interview, Pear’s statement is an accurate reflection of the president’s position.

The manly thing for the president to do would be to state the obvious: his love for abortion rights brooks no compromise. But he won’t do so, choosing instead to play the same old shell game he’s been playing all along. And he is not alone. For months, we were told that the bill did not cover funds for abortion, yet if that were true, there would have been no need for the Stupak amendment, and no resistance to it.

This was a great moment for the bishops, and for Catholics generally, but the fight continued. It was important that those on both sides knew exactly who the players were on each team.

OBAMA’S DOUBLE CROSS ON ABORTION

Presidential advisor David Axelrod made it clear that President Obama opposed the amendment introduced by Rep. Bart Stupak that would ban abortion funding in the House version of the health care bill. When the Senate version was completed, it contained nothing like the language of the Stupak amendment. As reported by the AP, “On a controversial issue that threatened to derail House legislation, [Senate Majority Leader] Reid would allow the new government insurance plan to cover abortions and would let companies that receive federal funds offer insurance plans that include abortion coverage.”

President Obama, after telling the public that he would not support a bill that provided federal funds for abortion (and was hailed by the U.S. bishops for doing so), championed the Senate bill that would do just that. Moreover, by pushing for this legislation, he did the opposite of what the American people support: In a CNN survey, 61 percent of the public is in favor of banning the use of federal funds to pay for abortion.

In other words, President Obama decided to renege on his promise, betray the bishops and defy the American people. That is risky business given that recent poll numbers show his job approval rating declining. And these results were before the public found out that he double crossed them on abortion.

CHURCH’S CRITICS WANT GAG RULE

Getting Nancy Pelosi to accept a health care bill that bans federal funding of abortion was the greatest victory scored by the U.S. bishops in a generation. It also unleashed an attempt to censor them. Among such attempts was that by Geoffrey Stone of the Huffington Post.

Stone found it troubling that the bishops were so vocal. He yearned for a time when JFK was president, a time when separation of church and state met his approval. Perhaps the Chicago law professor forgot about Rev. Martin Luther King, the minister who took to the pulpit and lobbied for civil rights in the name of free speech and religious liberty. Should King have been muzzled as well? Or did Stone just want to silence today’s bishops?

Here are some others who would like to censor the bishops: Rep. Lynn Woolsey, Rep. Diane DeGette, Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Frances Kissling, Planned Parenthood, Feminist Majority, Catholics for Choice, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, the National Organization for Women, and many others favored a gag rule.

Nancy Snyderman of MSNBC spoke for many when she said that “This is going to be a Pollyannaish statement. The Catholic bishops appearing and having a political voice seems to be a most fundamental violation of church and state.”

There were a number of religious groups that wanted abortion coverage in the health care bill, including: Episcopal Church, Union for Reform Judaism, Central Conference of American Rabbis, United Church of Christ, United Methodist Church, Unitarian Universalist, Presbyterian Church (USA), Lutheran Women’s Caucus and the YWCA.

So why didn’t Stone and company want to silence these groups as well? Let’s face it: they don’t have a principled bone in their collective bodies.