GAY GROUP ATTACKS FIRST AMENDMENT

griffin hrcBill Donohue comments on the Human Rights Campaign:

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) is ill-named: it is a gay rights group that often disrespects the human rights of those with whom it disagrees. Its latest burst of intolerance occurred yesterday when it attacked David Tyree, the New York Giants’ hero in the 2007 Super Bowl. HRC president Chad Griffin blasted the Giants for hiring Tyree as its Director of Player Development.

Tyree’s sin? He believes, as does most of the world, that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. He also believes that homosexuals can change their identity; he knows men who have. His sentiments are grounded in his religious convictions. Anyone is free to disagree with him, but to condemn a man for espousing such positions shows contempt for his twin First Amendment rights: freedom of speech and freedom of religion. In short, it is un-American.

The attempt to silence public figures for espousing traditional beliefs on sexuality is gaining momentum in the gay activist community. It must be resisted, especially by people of faith. It would never occur to me, as the president of the Catholic League, to fire off a statement condemning the hiring of an athlete who shared HRC’s views.

Griffin is particularly exercised over Tyree’s belief that sexual orientation can change. But many gays believe the same. After all, when the LGBT community added a “Q”—as in LGBTQ—they did so to include “Questioning.” Now what is there to question if sexual orientation is fixed? Their logic implodes.




OBAMA REJECTS RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION

obama-gayBill Donohue comments on President Obama’s latest assault on religious liberty:

For 20 years, Congress failed to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), suggesting that the legislation must be burdened with more than just a few controversial features. President Clinton and President Bush respected the right of the legislature not to pass the bill, but President Obama is different: he said he signed it because the bill had stalled in the Congress. Why we need the Congress at all he did not explain.

The president not only issued an Executive Order imposing ENDA, he chose to sign that version of the bill which fails to grant a religious exemption; all he did was to preserve the limited religious exemption that was coined by the Bush administration. He explicitly rejected several proposals that would have insulated religious institutions from state overreach. This is critical because of what is at stake: ENDA applies to “sex, sexual orientation [and] gender identity”; as we have learned, this includes behavior, not simply status.

Earlier versions of this bill said that “This Act shall not apply to a religious organization,” but in 2007 this exemption was made conditional. Obama, who has no aversion to exemptions—over 100 million are exempt from his signature ObamaCare legislation—cannot bring himself to exempt religious institutions whenever the issue touches on homosexuality. Which is why the bishops oppose ENDA.

Most reasonable persons distinguish between sexual orientation and sexual behavior, but not this gay-friendly, religion-unfriendly, administration. What does this mean? Look for cross-dressers and other lovely types to spring forward demanding their rights. Look for homosexuals to sue Catholic institutions that do business with the federal government insisting on pension benefits for their “spouse.”

The heart of the problem is (a) the mad idea that sexuality is a social construction, when, in fact, it is rooted in nature, and (b) an unyielding hostility to religious liberty.




JESUS AND POPE CALLED PIMPS

Rivers:MaherHere is what Joan Rivers and Bill Maher had to say on their July 18th shows:

Rivers: “First of all, let me just say, Kid Rock, when did he audition to play Jesus Christ Super Pimp?”

Maher: “The pope is a pimp. I’m serious.”

Bill Donohue comments on these outbursts:

I’m not sure who is watching Joan Rivers anymore, but it is obvious that she is not aging well. Indeed, she is crashing.

If Maher were indifferent about Catholicism, no one would complain. Instead, he has it stuck in his craw. From the work of psychologist Paul Vitz, we know that the one common feature that unites celebrated atheists is their troubled relationship with their father. Maher definitely has an authority problem, and his acting out against Catholicism can be seen as an extension of his personal problems.

The most disturbing aspect of publicly calling Jesus and Pope Francis pimps is not the name calling—it’s the passive reaction it receives in many elite quarters. Which is why Rivers and Maher still have their jobs.

Contact Kira Wagner about Rivers: kira.wagner@nbcuni.com

Contact Keith Cocozza about Maher: keith.cocozza@timewarner.com




TIME FOR MICHAEL SEAN WINTERS TO GO

wintersBill Donohue comments as follows:

Michael Sean Winters wants St. Paul and Minneapolis Archbishop John Nienstedt to resign. It is he who should resign.

Winters admits that the affidavit of Jennifer Haselberger, the person most responsible for hurling accusations at Nienstedt, is so blemished that “a good defense attorney could drive several trucks through the document.” That would be enough to make any reasonable person reject her testimony on anything. But Winters is not reasonable—he is irrational.

Regarding charges that Nienstedt “engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior” with adults—which the archbishop denies—Winters says he does “not really care” if this is true. I do. Why doesn’t Winters? It’s time he spoke with candor about his reasoning. He says he is concerned about whether Nienstedt violated the Dallas Charter. Fine. And what evidence does Winters offer? Nothing.

So what is Winters’ beef? He accuses Nienstedt of being “aloof” and “deeply conflicted.” If aloofness demands resignation, then Obama should have quit a long time ago, but no one at the National Catholic Reporter is about to call for his resignation. Winters says Nienstedt is conflicted about homosexuality (he has the shoe on the wrong foot), and takes him to task for once condemning the “wanton anal sex” in the film “Brokeback Mountain.” Such graphic words bother Winters. Yet it was the Reporter, in its quest to destroy a Republican operative who once had a one-night stand with a coed, that wrote the book on graphic sex. What it did was so vile it would have made Larry Flynt blush. The hypocrisy is stunning.

This orchestrated attempt to shove Nienstedt out the door, carried out by those who hate the Church’s teachings on sexuality, shows how deep their pathology is. They are acting like a runaway train, and they need to be derailed. In the meantime, it is time for Winters to go.




GANGING UP ON ARCHBISHOP NIENSTEDT

thBill Donohue comments on the latest attacks against Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis:

Not until a Minneapolis law firm finishes its investigation of Archbishop Nienstedt will we be able to know the answers to important questions, but it is not too early to condemn the rush to judgment that is being orchestrated by familiar foes of the archbishop. Here are some fast facts.

The war against Nienstedt began before he assumed his current post in 2008. Leading the charge were gay activists, dissident Catholics, and ex-Catholics. Last December, out of the blue, emerged an unidentified man who claimed Nienstedt touched his behind in 2009 while the archbishop was posing for a group picture. Nienstedt denied the charge and did something no leader would ever do: he stepped down. Not surprisingly, after the police investigated, the case was dismissed.

After a former archdiocesan employee, who had been suspended for failing to deal expeditiously with a complaint, made accusations that the archdiocese had failed to act expeditiously with molesting priests, Nienstedt convened a task force. It found “shortcomings.”

Then, out of the blue, Nienstedt was accused of inappropriate behavior of a non-criminal nature that allegedly occurred many years ago. Nienstedt denied wrongdoing, saying there was only one accusation: an ex-priest accused him of the “crime” of touching his neck.

It is striking that almost every problem priest who worked in the archdiocese did so before Nienstedt took charge in 2008.

More important, Nienstedt is being accused of harboring molesting priests. There is a profound difference between a priest who serves in active ministry, and one who does not. If someone knows of a molesting priest who is currently working in active ministry in the archdiocese, we need to know who he is. It’s time to name names, or shut up. In the meantime, Nienstedt, who has been found guilty of nothing, deserves to be treated as an innocent. Stay tuned.




NEW YORK DECLARES WAR ON KIDS

baby-covered-with-baby-towel-pm-thumb-270x270Bill Donohue comments on an announcement today by the New York City Health Department, New York State Department of Health, and the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation that they are launching a new initiative to increase access to contraception “immediately after childbirth”:

The anti-child mentality that marks Western nations has now been taken to a new level in New York City, the abortion-murder capital of the United States. So-called health officials will now try to convince a mother, “immediately after childbirth,” not to expand her family any further. This assumes, of course, that these anti-child crusaders first fail to persuade pregnant women to kill their child in utero.

The idea that the government is now in the business of arm-twisting women not to have more children, “immediately after childbirth,” is morally obnoxious and socially disturbing. It is so apt that this is happening in a city where its mayor lusts for abortion rights—showing no concern whatsoever for the health of unborn babies—while at the same time showing a maniacal concern for the alleged mistreatment of carriage horses in Central Park.

The health police have fast become a menace, and they most definitely do not speak for the dedicated men and women in the health professions. Moreover, contrary to what this initiative presupposes, humans are not the problem—they are the answer. In fact, given our dangerously low fertility rate, we need a pro-breeders campaign, not one that puts a cap on kids.

Contact NYC Health Press Office: PressOffice@health.nyc.gov




LETTERMAN SHOULD AVOID SEXUAL JOKES

david-lettermanOn last night’s “Late Show with David Letterman,” the host began by saying Pope Francis is thinking about lifting the celibacy requirement. “That’s right, the pope is saying that priests can be in a marriage with a woman and have sex.” [Women are shown cheering.]

The pope is also shown speaking to bishops and cardinals, his words dubbed over. “When two people love each other very much, they become more than just good friends. Eventually they might even get married and have a baby. The mommy and daddy make the baby together, but it grows inside the mommy.”

Letterman: “So if a priest sees someone out there in the crowd that he likes, he might send over some Communion wine.” [Letterman is shown pointing and winking at someone.] Off camera, band leader Paul Shaffer replies, “That little lady over there.” To which Letterman replies, “Priests having sex, can you believe that?” [The clip of the cheering women is replayed.]

Bill Donohue responds as follows:

Letterman is a sick man who is constantly being treated for his afflictions, so he needs to be very careful about what he says.

Here is the leading sentence from a CBS News story on the married host dated October 2, 2009: “David Letterman admitting on his show Thursday night that he’d had sex with female staffers and revealing he was the subject of a related extortion try could help keep his image from being tarnished, experts agree.”

Here is the leading sentence from an AP story dated January 7, 2013: “Three years after an extortion scandal that led him to bare his infidelities, David Letterman said he sees a psychiatrist once a week to try to be the person that he believed he was.”

Contact Diane Ekeblad, VP Entertainment Communications and Editorial Content at CBS: diane.ekeblad@cbs.com




BID TO KILL RELIGIOUS RIGHTS FAILS

thBill Donohue comments on the Senate vote held today on the Protect Women’s Health from Corporate Interference Act:

The assault on religious liberty lost today as the Senate failed to achieve the 60 votes necessary to advance this bill. While the outcome is welcome, the fact that a majority of Senators, almost all Democrats, are still bent on eviscerating the religious liberty rights of Americans is very disturbing. It seems they will stop at nothing to trample on our First Amendment freedoms.

The vote is being widely misreported by the media as a vote on contraception. It was not. The issue is abortion, not contraception. All four of the procedures that plaintiffs for Hobby Lobby cited in their brief involved at least the possibility that a pregnancy might be terminated; prevention and termination are not identical. Moreover, this company does not object to providing contraceptives. Ergo, attempts to override the high court’s decision has nothing to do with contraception.

The lust for abortion is sickening, and the war on religion is equally contemptuous. Outside the Capitol today there were anti-Catholic protesters flagging their signs, “KEEP YOUR ROSARIES OFF MY OVARIES.” The bigots were from Code Pink, the far left-wing band of activists. But we won’t look for Nancy Pelosi to condemn them, even though she loves to tout what a “devout Catholic” she is.




POPE’S REMARKS ON IMMIGRANTS WELCOME

rBill Donohue comments on remarks recently made by Pope Francis on the immigration crisis facing the United States:

There are those on the right and the left who have misrepresented what the pope has said about the immigration crisis. Understandably, those on both sides of this issue are unhappy with the pope’s comments, but that is no excuse for distorting them.

It may not please those on the right to learn that the pope implores Americans to care for children who have crossed the border seeking help. But that is exactly what Catholics are expected to do: to tend to the needs of the dispossessed, regardless of whether they broke the law to get here.

It may not please those on the left to learn that the pope has never said we should encourage illegal migration, or that the U.S. should adopt an open borders approach. But that is exactly what Catholics are expected to do: respect a nation’s sovereignty.

It is one thing to condemn racism and xenophobia, which the pope has done, quite another to say that the U.S. should take a laissez-faire attitude toward illegal immigration, which the pope has rejected.

In his statement on July 14, the pope explicitly said that the international community must press those countries involved to “inform the public of the dangers of the trip north and to promote development of the migrants’ countries of origin.” That is not exactly the equivalent of admonishing Americans that we need to welcome the world to our shores. Yes, the pope says we need to “help” these people, but he has never said that we need to retain them.

In short, the Catholic way is to treat all humans with equal dignity, independent of their legal status, while at the same time taking reasonable measures to secure our border.

Everyone has a right to disagree with this approach, but no one has a right to caricature what the Holy Father has said.




NEW ASSAULT ON RELIGIOUS RIGHTS

Obama-assault-on-religious-libertyBill Donohue comments on the latest assault on religious rights:

Anticipating a loss in the Hobby Lobby case, the Obama administration, together with Congressional Democrats, worked overtime this year on a law that would effectively gut the high court ruling. They also plotted to gut the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), upon which the case is based. This assault on the First Amendment will be presented tomorrow when the Senate votes on the Protect Women’s Health from Corporate Interference Act.

RFRA was passed by an almost unanimous decision in 1993, and was signed by President Clinton. The sponsors of this new bill say they are not taking aim at RFRA, but in fact they are: it is a stop-gap measure designed to cripple RFRA. Rep. Diana DeGette, a co-author of the House version of this law, has already stated that this bill is “an interim solution”; she pledged to then “look at broader issues, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.” Their goal is to ultimately kill RFRA.

This bill is a deliberate attempt to circumvent the will of the Congress, as expressed in RFRA, and the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby ruling. It is being done in the name of women’s rights, but its real impulse is to privatize religious expression, relegating it to the margins of society. Moreover, this bill has nothing to do with contraception, per se: the Hobby Lobby decision was driven by the right of some private employers not to pay for abortion procedures. This bill would force all employers to pay for abortifacients, and ultimately all abortions.

This law also seeks to ratify the most odious elements of the Health and Human Services mandate: it wants to redefine what constitutes a Catholic non-profit, effectively punishing Catholic social service agencies for not discriminating against non-Catholics.

The Catholic League strongly supports the statement released yesterday by Cardinal Seán O’Malley and Archbishop William Lori on this law: we need more religious rights, not less.