Catholic League president Bill Donohue is asking Catholics to provide Jay Leno with some new script. He explains why:

Last night, Jay Leno did what comes natural to him—he bashed Catholicism for the umpteenth time. His scriptwriters handed him a few lines about one miscreant priest, and he took the opportunity to hype the case further by lying about what happened. The priest was charged with ripping off his parish to pay for his online porn habit, but this wasn’t good enough for Leno. He wanted to implicate the entire Catholic Church. So what did he do? He said “the Church transferred him to another parish that has free WiFi. Yeah, so that’s nice.” Leno lied about the transfer; he did so because his goal was to indict the Church.

In the event Leno wants to practice diversity, we have some new script:

· In the news this week is the story of a woman being sentenced to death under Islamic law in Pakistan. Her crime? She is a Christian.

· Last week, Oprah Winfrey was in the news for featuring a discussion with adults who were sexually abused by Episcoplaian priests in their youth.

· This week it was reported that 17 Jews have been charged with stealing $42 million from Holocaust survivors; the money was financed by the German government.

Imagine how much fun Leno could have with script like this! He wouldn’t even have to lie about any of it to get a good laugh.

Send your ideas to Leno’s producer, Debbie Vickers: Debbie.vickers@nbc.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue announces the Catholic League’s Christmas project for 2010:

The atheists are out in force this year trying to neuter Christmas. While a few of their efforts are benign, e.g., the United Community of Reason’s bus billboards, “Don’t Believe in God? Join the Club”, most are predictably hostile, e.g., the American Atheists’ billboard that features a picture of a nativity scene with the inscription, “You Know it’s a Myth. This Season Celebrate Reason.”

The Catholic League does not have to resort to negative advertising to get its point across, and that is why we raised the money last month to launch a Christmas campaign that almost everyone will like, save for embittered atheists. A week ago, we mailed a Holy Family Nativity Scene [click here] to the nation’s 50 governors; a letter to the governors alerting them that our gift was being sent in care of their chief of staff was first sent. We know they arrived because we already received a kind letter from one governor, Phil Bredesen of Tennessee.

In my letter to the governors, I explained that it was our “sincere hope that it [the crèche] will be displayed in the Capitol Rotunda alongside secular symbols (e.g., a Christmas tree) this coming Christmas season.” I also made clear that this is entirely legal: “We are paying for it because we believe it would be inappropriate to use public monies to pay for religious symbols. But we also believe, consistent with Supreme Court rulings, that there is no constitutional prohibition banning privately-funded crèches from being displayed alongside secular symbols.”

In the December edition of our monthly journal, Catalyst, we are publishing the names of the 50 chiefs of staff [click here]; this way our members can contact them if they do not see a manger scene in the Capitol Rotunda.

So let the militant atheists do their thing, appealing to debased motives. We’re taking the moral high road.

A vote on the proposed U.N. resolution condemning religious defamation is expected to take place this week. Catholic League president Bill Donohue explains why it should be resisted:

The Catholic League is an anti-defamation organization that uses such First Amendment guarantees as freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly to protest Catholic bashing. But it is one thing to issue a news release, conduct a letter-writing campaign, call for a boycott or hold a street demonstration; it is quite another to criminalize offensive speech.

It is not just that this U.N. resolution is poorly worded, it is the intent behind it: it is being promoted by member states that are known for disrespecting human rights, including, most spectacularly, religious liberties.

Since 1999, Pakistan has been pushing for this anti-blasphemy resolution. Joined by nations like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the resolution is not a check on religious defamation: rather, it is designed to give Islamist nations the right to plunder the religious rights of non-Muslims—under the guise of fighting religious intolerance!

There is a reason why the Christian community in the Middle East has shrunk to less than two percent of the population—they’ve been driven out. Just recently, the Syrian Catholic cathedral in Baghdad was the scene of violence that left 58 dead and at least 75 wounded. Their crime? They were Catholics.

The Catholic League supports all democratic remedies that thwart religious intolerance, but it will never support fascistic laws. These Muslim nations already kill Christians and Jews with impunity; they don’t need any further encouragement to bring their idea of justice to the shores of other nations. This resolution, “On Combating Defamation of Religions,” is an affront to religious liberty and deserves to be voted down.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue looks at CNN’s coverage of the Catholic Church’s opposition to gay marriage:

A week after the election, CNN is still questioning the role that Archbishop John Nienstedt played in urging Minnesota Catholics not to support same-sex marriage. In a news story posted today, CNN claims that the Archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis divided the faithful by urging his clergy to mail 400,000 DVDs on this subject. The cable network also said that this decision raises serious questions about the Catholic Church’s tax-exempt status.

CNN, of course, said absolutely nothing during the fall campaigns about the aggressive role played by black churches. In one African-American church after another, Democratic candidates were allowed to make a campaign speech; in some cases, they were endorsed from the pulpit. Moreover, CNN said absolutely nothing about the support for gay marriage emanating from some Protestant churches.

CNN provided no evidence that Archbishop Nienstedt has divided the flock. Instead, it quoted Dan Maguire, an embittered ex-priest who has long been at war with the Catholic Church. But it did float the question whether the Church’s tax-exempt status was in jeopardy. Obviously, it isn’t, because if it were then all those churches and synagogues that support abortion rights would be at risk.

When the Catholic Church endorses efforts to end poverty, or calls for nuclear disarmament, the CNNs of this world never raise a peep. It’s just when the Church speaks out in favor of traditional marriage or the life of the unborn that it triggers a hostile response.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on today’s New York Times “Arts” section:

Were it any other newspaper, it wouldn’t merit a response. But only a month after being justly hammered by New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, the New York Times is at it again, using its Friday “Arts” section to tweak Catholic sensibilities (Dolan registered two complaints, one of which was about an “insulting photograph” of a man dressed as a nun). Today, it is not the photo that is objectionable—a picture of five priests, two of whom are holding hands—it is the intended implication found in the caption below: “A 19th-century photograph of Roman Catholic priests in Danh Vo’s ‘Autoerotic Asphyxiation,’ at Artists Space.”

In the accompanying article, all we learn about the photo is that the priests were about to leave France for missionary work in Asia, one of whom was beheaded in Vietnam in 1861 (he was canonized as a saint in 1988). So what gives? How does this photo relate to autoerotic asphyxiation? Seen through the eyes of most men, namely heterosexuals, there is no connecting link. But for some homosexuals, male touching of the most innocent kind always carries a sexual connotation.

For example, the article discusses a homosexual photographer, Joseph Carrier, who bestowed Vo with much of his work. While in Vietnam from 1962 to 1973, “he privately documented the casual interactions he observed, intimate without necessarily being homoerotic, between Vietnamese men.” Like shirtless guys hanging out? Who knows?

It is still not clear, at least seen through the lens of heterosexuality, why Vo chose to label his work “autoerotic asphyxiation.” No matter, it’s clear that the Times invited those leafing through the “Arts” section to make the connection between priests and this depraved sexual act.

Contact Arthur Brisbane, the Times’ ombudsman, and tell him we’re on to their game: public@nytimes.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on last night’s election results:

For the past few decades, Catholics have decided who wins elections nationally. After the McGovernization of the Democratic Party in 1972, Catholics were left homeless: they felt betrayed by the Democrats and were leery of the Republicans; they have been up for grabs ever since. Last night they proved once again that of the three major religions in the U.S., they are the ones that count most: Protestants never abandon the Republicans, and Jews never abandon the Democrats.

Catholics voted 58-40 for the Republican candidates last night. This was a dramatic 20-point swing from two years ago. What caused Catholics to bolt is not clear, but there is one issue that surely played a major role: the out-of-control debt. Practicing Catholics (the others should not be counted as Catholics for polling purposes) understand the virtue of self-denial, and by extension, they value belt tightening at home. What they don’t appreciate is promiscuity, be it sexual, fiscal or otherwise.

Michael Sean Winters, a liberal Catholic writer, bemoans what happened, saying that the Democratic loss means “Anti-poverty efforts are off the table.” This is cause for celebration: the anti-poverty efforts of the Obama administration has resulted in a poverty rate of 14.3 percent, the highest national rate since 1994. If a jobs-centered economic plan is adopted, the poverty rate will likely decline.

Here’s something to watch. The Department of Health and Human Services is now pondering whether to adopt the ACLU’s initiative that would force Catholic hospitals to provide emergency abortions as a condition of receiving federal funds; this would effectively close most of them. If this were to happen, a whole lot more than six in ten Catholics would vote for the Republicans in 2012. The fact that the Obama administration is even giving this serious consideration is something that every Catholic in the nation should know about. Had last night’s results gone the other way, it’s a sure bet the anti-Catholic agenda would have benefited.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue looks at a front-page piece in today’s New York Times on the controversy surrounding an honorary Oscar scheduled to be presented to European filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard:

According to the Times article, there is “the touchy question of how to deal with newly highlighted claims that Mr. Godard, a master of modern film, has long harbored anti-Jewish views that threaten to widen his distance from Hollywood, even as the film industry’s leading institution is trying to close the gap.”

How revealing. Godard is controversial in Hollywood because the Jewish community which populates it is upset at him for his alleged anti-Semitism. But no one in Hollywood that we know of has ever spoken up about the propriety of giving an Oscar to someone associated with harboring anti-Catholic views (Harvey Weinstein comes quickly to mind). The hypocrisy is stunning.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Bill Maher’s appearance on CNN last night:

Wolf Blitzer asked Bill Maher to discuss the remarks he made last Friday night on his show about Muslims. On his HBO show, Maher expressed concerns about the popularity of naming boys Muhammad in the U.K., noting the high birth rate of Muslims and how this does not bode well for the future. When asked to explain himself, Maher gave a lengthy response, citing his interest in maintaining such Western values as liberty and equality (he either does not know that those values originated with Christianity, or does not want to admit it).

Maher’s response to Muslims was eminently fair. But when contrasted with his comments on Catholics, it made him look like a rank hypocrite. The kinds of despicable statements he has made over the years about Catholicism—trashing Jesus, mocking the Eucharist, ridiculing the pope, portraying all priests as molesters—demonstrates his duplicity. Even when pressed to explain his “controversial” remarks about Muslims, he showed more respect for Islam than he has ever shown for Catholicism. Indeed, he looked positively defensive last night trying to get this monkey off his back: he is never defensive about discussing his Catholic bashing. Indeed, he usually contributes to it even further when asked to comment.

Contact Maher’s HBO producer, Billy Martin: billy.martin@realtimehbo.com