Bill Donohue released the following remarks today:

The Salvation Army is under increasing attack from homosexual activists this Christmas season. The Christian organization is under fire for merely holding Christian beliefs on marriage and the family—it does not discriminate against anyone—and now the war has extended to a formal resolution by the Associated Students of the University of California at Berkeley calling for a ban of Salvation Army donation boxes on campus; university officials are considering the request.

An organized effort to boycott the Salvation Army is also under way. A gay website, watermarkonline.com, is asking its readers nationwide not to give to the charitable organization. Gays in Chicago have launched their own campaign to withhold donations. The net result is that more of the needy will go without this Christmas season, thanks to the efforts of these homosexuals.

Not only does the Salvation Army not discriminate in hiring, and in whom they serve, it does not lobby for any cause. Indeed, its only agenda is serving the dispossessed. Yet to those driven by a lust for power in the homosexual community, it makes sense to sacrifice the poor for the purpose of advancing their agenda.

It is too kind to say this is another example of political correctness: It is nothing less than an attempt to punish thought. This, of course, is one of the ugliest traits of the totalitarian mindset. That its intellectual home is the University of California, Berkeley, should surprise no one.

Please give to the Salvation Army this Christmas. Let them know we support their charitable goals, as well as their courage in standing up to bullies.

Bill Donohue released the following comments today:

Yesterday, we listed the e-mail address of the Human Resources department of JB Partners, the company responsible for telling senior citizens at The Willows in Newhall, California that they must remove the Christmas tree; the residents were informed that the tree was religious.

After our news release was issued, the company was bombarded with thousands of e-mails. The good news is that late yesterday afternoon, the senior citizens were told they could get their Christmas tree back.

Many thanks to all those who protested. It goes to show that while cable TV commentators may opine on the War on Christmas, it takes an organized effort by a national civil rights organization to bring about real change.

Bill Donohue comments on yesterday’s U.S. District Court ruling which allows the Archdiocese of New York to proceed with its lawsuit against the Health and Human Services (HHS) abortifacient mandate:

Not only did the Obama administration lose, it got a well deserved lecture from the bench: it was taken to task for misrepresenting the current burdens that the HHS mandate has placed on the New York Archdiocese.

The Obama team tried to have it both ways, and it failed. On the one hand, it ordered Catholic entities to get ready to implement the mandate, and on the other hand it said that because some modifications may yet be made, complaints that the mandate has already burdened the archdiocese are baseless. But U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan wasn’t buying it.

Judge Cogan said the Obama administration’s arguments “ring hollow.” He quoted the HHS Interim Final Rules back to the Obama lawyers; they hung themselves with their own wording. The Rules made clear that “these interim final regulations require significant lead time to implement,” emphasizing that “in order to allow plans and health insurance coverage to be designed and implemented on a timely basis, regulations must be published and available to the public well in advance of the effective date of the requirements.”

It is impossible to improve on Judge Cogan’s ruling when he said “the First Amendment does not require citizens to accept assurances from the government that, if the government later determines it has made a misstep, it will take ameliorative action. There is no ‘Trust us, changes are coming’ clause in the Constitution. To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards government self-restraint and self-correction.”

The battle over the HHS mandate is not over, but what happened yesterday bodes well for those who believe in religious liberty.

Bill Donohue comments on the early reaction to news that Pope Benedict XVI has established a Twitter account:

Most of the world’s reaction to the pope’s use of Twitter has been extraordinarily positive, but his enemies are having a field day. Two quick examples.

The Kansas City Star and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette have long been among the most anti-Catholic newspapers in the nation. So it is not surprising that their love for abortion rights and the right of two men to marry would lead them to suffer apoplexy over the pope’s Twitter account. This is why their respective cartoonists, Lee Judge and Rob Rogers, exploded in anger today at the pope; they used these issues to hammer the pope’s use of Twitter to advance his views.

No one will stop the Holy Father from championing the rights of children, born and unborn, and the integrity of marriage and the family. Those who find his positions objectionable have every reason to be scared: the more people learn how abortion kills, and homosexual marriages dilute the privileged position of traditional marriages, the more they are likely to embrace the pope’s idea of civil rights and the common good.

Bill Donohue issues a call to action based on a story by the L.A. Daily News that is posted on the Drudge Report:

Residents at a Newhall, California senior citizens’ apartment complex have been told to remove their Christmas tree. JB Partners Group Inc. told staff at The Willows residence that the Christmas tree was a religious symbol and must be taken down.

Because this is a private venue, there is no role for government involvement. But there is a moral issue here, and it is one that needs to be addressed. The residents, including those who are not Christian, want the Christmas tree. Moreover, the tree is not a religious symbol.

I suggest that everyone e-mail the tyrants who are attempting to shove their secular agenda down the throats of these senior citizens. Tell those who work in Human Resources at JB Partners what you think.

Contact: JBjobs@jbproperty.net

Bill Donohue released the following remarks today:

Starting this weekend, Jews will celebrate Hanukkah, and three weeks from now Christians will celebrate Christmas. Unfortunately, there have already been several instances where menorahs and nativity scenes have been trashed, but none worse than what happened in Miami Sunday night.

Not only was a large menorah vandalized in Miami Beach, on the base of the Chabad House menorah was written, “You Killed Jesus.” Unlike some other instances of vandalism, this was not the work of teenage drunks. No, this was clearly the work of bigots seeking to inflame religious tensions. Rabbi Zev Katz, who erected the menorah, is taking the high road: he says this offense will not weaken the Jewish community’s outreach in the area. Catholics should embrace him.

Catholics in the area are urged to contact Miami-Dade Crime Stoppers at (305) 471-TIPS if they have any leads on this vicious crime.

Bill Donohue released the following remarks today:

A piece by Richard Fausta posted on the website of Business Review Europe commenting on how Brits should celebrate Christmas in the workplace [click here] has application to Americans this time of year.

Fausta says “Office decorations during the Christmas season is seen as one reason toward the notion that employees can lose focus.” For example, he notes, “Talking with co-workers about Christmas preparations, discussing shopping, parties and decorations can be perplexing to any manager dealing with staff productivity.” I asked our vice president about this. We can’t relate to that, Bernadette Brady said. “Partying is precisely what allows us to focus.”

Fausta advises that “It’s best for employees to keep any highly religious displays inside the walls of cubicles.” We can’t relate to that Brady said. “We all have windowed offices.”

“If one of your colleagues wants to put up a picture of Jesus, but he works next to a Buddhist,” Fausta advises, “there may be some sensitivities involved to deal with.” We can’t relate to that Brady said. “We don’t hire Buddhists.”

Ever sensitive, Fausta observes that “What smells like a beautiful mix of holiday smells of cinnamon, baked apples, and gingerbread may make your Indian colleague keel over in convulsions.” We can’t relate to that Brady said. “We don’t hire Indians.”

“One survey found 85 percent of companies that decorate their offices have had to adjust policies as a result of complaints about the decorations,” Fausta said. “We can’t relate to that Brady said. “We only hire Catholics.”

In other words, to avoid complaints of discrimination in the workplace, be sure to discriminate when hiring. Either that or tell the whiners to get a life.

Bill Donohue comments on data from a new Gallup study of religion that was released today:

Seven in ten Americans are either very religious (40 percent) or moderately religious (29 percent). Consistent with other surveys, Gallup found women to be more religious than men; blacks are more religious than whites; religious identity increases with age; Southerners are the most religious; those in the northeastern and northwestern corners are the least religious; Republicans are more religious than Democrats; and the U.S. is still a largely Christian nation.

With regard to the latter category, 77 percent of Americans are Christian, and an amazing 94 percent of those who have a religious identity are Christian. Thus does the multicultural argument collapse. Indeed, all the talk about the U.S. being so diverse that we have no common religion anymore is pure bunk (and wishful thinking). This needs to be said at Christmastime more than ever: those who attempt to neuter the holiday rely on the false premise of multiculturalism.

Frank Newport’s excellent analysis comes up short on the issue of women. “The fact that women are more religious than men is discordant with the fact that large religious groups in the U.S. prohibit women from being clergy,” he says. “These groups, including Catholics and Southern Baptists, may find themselves in a gender crisis of sorts, with the increasing chance of losing their most fervent members to religious groups more formally open to women at all levels of service to the church.”

If what Newport says were true, we surely would have evidence by now that Catholic and Southern Baptist women are migrating to the mainline Protestant denominations. In point of fact, mainline Protestants are precisely the ones losing the most members. Moreover, it is not the “most fervent members” who are the most likely to bolt—it is the most liberal among them.

More on this at a later date when I obtain a copy of God Is Alive and Well: The Future of Religion in America.

Bill Donohue released the following comments today:

The Catholic Left has been trying to unseat Kansas City-St. Joseph Bishop Robert Finn for well over a year. Their effort received another boost today from the New York Times. It deserves a response.

The Times says that Finn’s conviction of a misdemeanor “stemmed from his failure to report the Rev. Shawn Ratigan to the authorities after hundreds of pornographic pictures that Father Ratigan had taken of young girls were discovered on his laptop in December 2010.”

That statement is factually wrong. On October 15, 2011 the Times mentioned there was “a single photo of a young girl, nude from the waist down,” and “hundreds of photographs of children” showing “upskirt images and images focused on the crotch.”

Now anyone who takes such pictures is clearly disturbed. But it also needs to be said that crotch shots are not pornographic. Moreover, the diocese described the “single photo” of a naked girl to a police officer who served on the diocesan sexual review board, and he said it did not constitute pornography. So why would the Times say that “hundreds of pornographic pictures” were found two years ago this month? The record shows that it was not until after the diocese called the cops in May 2011 that porn pictures were found on Ratigan’s computer.

On February 23, 1998, a Times editorial railed against those who try to equate “nude photographs of children” with child pornography. So it is more than just a little hypocritical of the Times to now feign indignation over a single photo of a nude child.

Under Bishop Finn, the review board was contacted, the authorities were notified, and an independent investigation was ordered (the Graves Report). In short, Bishop Finn deserves better. The attack on him, coming exclusively from the Catholic Left, smacks of an agenda.