During the month of October, a billboard in West Lubbock, Texas created quite a stir. It featured a tattooed Jesus; there was also an accompanying video on the website of Jesustattoo.org.

When we saw a picture of the billboard on the Internet, we quickly learned why some Christians might be disconcerted. At first blush, the sight of a Jesus-figure, standing with his arms outstretched, covered with tattoos, is jarring; on his body are such words as “Outcast” and “Addicted.” But the video offers a much more complete, and satisfying, picture of the intended message.

In the video, a woman is shown with a tattoo on her body that reads, “Self Righteous”; Jesus changes the inscription to “Humbled.” Similarly, a young disabled boy’s tattoo is changed from “Outcast” to “Accepted.” This theme is consistently stated throughout the presentation.

The video shows how Jesus forgives and transforms the life of sinners. It also shows how Jesus loves those who have been rejected by society, offering them hope. Indeed, the six-minute video shows how the promise of salvation awaits those who follow Jesus. As such, it is a positive and quite moving statement. We applaud this novel effort to showcase the power and glory of Jesus Christ.

The media reaction was interesting. Most stories concentrated exclusively on the billboard, not the video. Why? Because the billboard was controversial and the video was not. We would be remiss if we did not add that the media also has no real interest in promoting a positive view of Christianity.

In our October 10, 2013 news release, we provided a link to the video.

This advertisement appeared in the New York Times OP-ED page on Monday, June 15, 1998.

“SHYLOCK AND SAMBO” HITS BROADWAY This fall, a play called “Shylock and Sambo” will appear on Broadway. An advance copy of the script says that it features gay Jewish slavemasters who sodomize their obsequious black slaves. Though it is often vulgar, it is nonetheless a major work of art. The theater company that is producing it receives federal, state and local funding. The response from gay, Jewish and black groups has been to denounce the play as bigotry. But an editorial in the New York Times exclaims, “That there is a native strain of bigotry, violence and contempt for artistic expression in this country is not news.” Moreover, noted playwrights have rushed to defend the play, citing freedom of speech and respect for the arts. Now if this isn’t fairy land, nothing is. The artistic community would never dream of offending gays, Jews and blacks, and the New York Times would never write such nonsense. But when it comes to a play that features a Christ-like character having sex with the apostles, a different standard emerges: the Times quote that was mentioned was exactly this newspaper’s reaction to the Catholic League’s protest of Terrence McNally’s “Corpus Christi.” Not a word was uttered about Christian bashing. Indeed, the editorial was labeled, “Censoring Terrence McNally.” Question: who are the censors? Gays tried to shut down the movie, “Cruising,” Jews sought to stop the publication of “A Nation on Trial,” feminists blasted “Smack My Bitch Up,” Puerto Ricans rallied against “Seinfeld,” etc. Were any of these groups branded as censors for registering their moral outrage? So why the double standard? The Catholic League does not want the government to shut down “Corpus Christi” (the producers should gut it). But it does want artists to put an end to their hate speech and bury their anti-Catholic hatchet once and for all. Legal rights are not necessarily moral rights. So let the debate begin, with one standard for all.
William A. Donohue President
	Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights 1011 First Avenue, New York, NY 10022 (212) 371-3191 Fax: (212) 371-3394 http://catholicleague.org

Bill Donohue comments on a play set to open in Oklahoma City:

“The Most Fabulous Story Ever Told” opens tomorrow at the Oklahoma City Civic Center; it lasts until Dec. 22. When it opened in the East Village in New York in 1998, I said, “it sounds like a routine homosexual play: full-frontal male nudity, filthy language, discussions of body parts, butch lesbians, effeminate gay men, ranting about nature, damning God for AIDS, etc.” The play was a flop, never making it to Broadway. Now the taxpayers, both nationally and in Oklahoma, are paying for it.

The play is a gay rendition of the Bible, focusing mostly on the Old Testament. It opens with two men in jockstraps (of course) in the Garden of Eden, one of whom identifies himself as a Jew. They run into a self-described bull dyke and her lesbian lover. This masterpiece is the work of Paul Rudnick, a homosexual “Jew from New Jersey.” His goal, he said, is to mock religion: he is angry at God for allowing AIDS. Naturally.

The play is being performed at a city-owned venue, and is being presented by the Oklahoma City Theatre Company. The latter receives funding from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Oklahoma Arts Council; the Arts Council refused to fund this play, but contributed $18,000 to other productions during the 2013-2014 season.

It is against federal and state laws to fund religion, making absurd the notion that the public must pay for attacks on it. Civic Center officials say the play does not contain full-frontal male nudity. However, it does include simulated sex acts, and the Arts Council is explicitly prohibited by state law from funding such fare (money being fungible, it is).

Rachel Irick, the director of the Theatre Company, says “We need to build our diverse audience and offer a different Christmas story.” Well, Rachel, anti-Semitic bigots have some great ideas on how to write a play that trashes Jews. Any interest in a “different Hanukkah story”?

Contact: Rachel@okctc.org

Bill Donohue comments on the decision by Saint Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John C. Nienstedt to temporarily step down:

Archbishop Nienstedt has been the subject of a non-stop crusade orchestrated by ex-Catholics, and Catholics in rebellion against the Church, simply because he stands for everything they are not: he is a loyal son of the Catholic Church.

Now—out of the blue—comes an unidentified male who claims he was touched on his buttocks in 2009 by the archbishop while posing for a group photo. Nienstedt denies the charge, adding that he has never inappropriately touched anyone. Moreover, he has not been told the identity of his accuser.

The Catholic League is asking those who were there to share with us any information they have. Specifically, we are interested in obtaining a tape recording, or set of photos, of any Confirmation ceremony in 2009 where Archbishop Nienstedt was present; presumably, the alleged victim was standing next to the archbishop. Also, we are asking anyone who knows anything about the accuser (someone knows who he is) to come forward. Please email us at pr@catholicleague.org.

I know of no other leader, religious or secular, who would step down pending an investigation because some guy says he was touched on his behind four years ago in a group photo. It’s time the bishops revised their “zero tolerance” policy. Too often, it means zero justice for the accused, thus undermining the legal principle of innocent until proven guilty.

When it comes to “zero tolerance” in the schools, every teachers union, as well as the New York Times, has counseled against it. With good reason: it does not allow for the nuances that color so many cases. The bishops ought to follow suit and junk this policy before it becomes the weapon of choice against them.

Bill Donohue comments on how so-called victims’ advocates are participating in the war on religion:

Freedom From Religion Foundation is an atheist organization. BishopAccountability.org and the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests monitor clergy sexual abuse. On the surface, the former has nothing in common with the latter two, but what joins the three of them at the hip—indeed what really motivates all of their work—is their hatred of Christianity.

Hobby Lobby is a Christian-owned private business that is contesting the constitutionality of the Health and Human Services mandate in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court. Its lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with either atheism or priestly sexual abuse, so why are the aforementioned entities challenging Hobby Lobby? It can’t be because the owners of Hobby Lobby don’t want to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization in their insurance plan. What do these matters have to do with atheism and clergy sexual abuse?

If we ever needed more evidence that the war on religion is real, this is it. The mask is off: the amici really haven’t strayed from promoting atheism or combating sexual abuse; rather, they are just validating their raison d’être. No wonder they chose “victims’ advocate” Marci Hamilton to write their brief: she perfectly represents their true cause.

Bill Donohue comments on tonight’s PBS “Frontline” 90 minute presentation, “Secrets of the Vatican”:

“Secrets of the Vatican” marks the 48th time PBS has addressed sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. Though this problem is practically non-existent in the Catholic community these days, and is rampant in the public schools, as well as in the Orthodox Jewish community, PBS has devoted a combined total of ZERO episodes on both.

All the contrived melodrama is there: ominous dark images; dramatic music; a deep voice-over; bleak hallways; shadowy figures locking doors as a boy enters the room; the words “Power,” “Money,” and “Sex” flashing about, etc. The predictable villain: Pope Benedict XVI. Ironically, he did more than anyone to check this problem, but facts don’t matter when Jason Berry is involved.

A dissident Catholic, Berry is a co-producer of this show; he was also featured in Alex Gibney’s film, “Mea Maxima Culpa.” Indeed, tonight’s hit job is nothing more than a retread of Gibney’s propaganda: a New Orleans reporter who previewed it says, “this film reminded me of ‘Mea Maxima Culpa.'” These guys can’t go to the sewer too often.

Catholic bashers love to focus on “persecuted” gays, without, of course, holding them responsible for anything. We are told how easy it is to meet a gay priest in Rome, “and then at the altar the following Sunday.” Then we meet a promiscuous gay priest who says the Church’s teachings on homosexuality are “like a knife in your heart.” No doubt some alcoholic priests find the Church’s teachings on alcohol consumption difficult as well, but few would demand that the teachings must change.

None of these people at PBS give a hoot about the sexual abuse of minors, for if they did, they would cover those communities where it is thriving. No, their goal is to discredit the moral voice of Catholicism.

Contact Frontline Press Person, Patrice Taddonio: Patrice_taddonio@wgbh.org

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on The Daily Caller story [click here] exposing Media Matters for America:

From the very beginning, Media Matters has set its sights on Christianity. In 2004, its leader, David Brock, made clear his goals when he applied to the IRS for a tax-exempt status. “It is common for news and commentary by the press to present viewpoints that tend to overly promote corporate interests, the rights of the wealthy, and a conservative Christian-influenced ideology,” the application says.

Anyone who has followed the history of Media Matters knows it has evolved into something far more extreme than what its founding statement said. To be frank, it is one thing for left-wing activists to promote a radical agenda, quite another to finger a world religion for monitoring. If conservatives launched a media watchdog group to combat a “reactionary Islamic-influenced ideology,” all hell would break loose. Indeed, New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly has come under fire for merely keeping a watchful eye on suspected Islamic extremists.

In 1981, Norman Lear founded People for the American Way to combat the so-called Religious Right, but his ambition was to fight conservative Christian policy prescriptions. Media Matters is more invidious: in the name of fighting media bias and fact-checking, it seeks to intimidate the mainstream media from disseminating legitimate Christian positions.

We now know, thanks to The Daily Caller, that the goal of Media Matters all along has been to silence the Christian voice.

Contact Jess Levin at Media Matters: jlevin@mediamatters.org

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:

Here’s a scenario worth contemplating: let’s assume that the federal government tries to censor the New York Times, and that critics of the newspaper take it to task for complaining that their “free speech” rights have been violated. Would not the Times be justly angered at the suggestion that their First Amendment right to free speech was being discussed as if it were their so-called free speech rights? Well, here’s how it handles the religious liberty rights of Catholics, now under fire from President Obama.

• Reporter Laurie Goodstein writes a story on “Bishops Open ‘Religious Liberty’ Drive” (11-15-11)
• An editorial slams Mitt Romney for “promising to defend the Roman Catholic Church’s ‘religious liberty’” (2-2-12)
• An editorial discusses the “phony crisis over ‘religious liberty’” (2-11-12)

Bloggers and other newspapers are also picking up on the “religious liberty” rights of Catholics (Pam’s House Blend, 2-10-12; Ira Chernus, religiondispatches.org, 2-21-12; an editorial in Vermont’s Brattleboro Reformer, 2-21-12).

The New York Times’ game of dumbing down the religious liberty rights of Catholics even extends to mocking the title of pro-life leaders. On Feb. 16, Richard Doerflinger, the associate director of the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities of the bishops’ conference, was referred to in a news story as the “associate director of ‘pro-life activities.’”

It would be wrong to conclude that the Times always speaks derisively about religious liberty. In an editorial on Nov. 22, 2010, it pointedly said, “Mr. Obama respects religious liberty.” And on Sept. 19, 2011, it said, “Mayor Michael Bloomberg rightly stood up for religious liberty.” The issue? Bloomberg’s support for building a mosque at Ground Zero.