Bill Donohue questions the State Department’s priorities:

We know that President Obama is infinitely more sensitive to the concerns of Muslims than Christians. He cites Christians by name when he wants to blame them for some historical event, but he never mentions Muslims by name for their current slaughter of innocent Christians. His Secretary of State, John Kerry, is at one with him.

Seven months ago, the Congress created a special envoy for religious minorities in the Middle East and South Central Asia. The State Department job remains unfilled, and no one has been named to assume the post. By contrast, two months ago the State Department named Randy Berry, a homosexual who claims to be married, to the spanking new job as special envoy for the human rights of LGBT persons. Randy started two weeks ago.

So why is it that the Middle East, which is home to the 21st century’s first genocide, commands less attention than the rights of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender persons? Because the “religious minorities” that the special envoy post is supposed to address are mostly Christians.

Too bad all Christians weren’t gay—then they would have a voice in the State Department.

Bill Donohue comments on jokes about women and religion:

Writers for late night talk-show hosts are obsessed with Catholicism, especially those who work for David Letterman. Generally speaking, Conan O’Brien has been fair; Seth Meyers less so. Both of them offered jokes about Catholicism and women in their latest outing.

“New pope doing everything he can to modernize the church,” said O’Brien. “That’s what I like about this pope. He’s trying to take the church into the 25th century. Pope Francis has reportedly advised new priests not to give boring sermons. And! He’s also telling nuns to start wearing tank tops.”

Meyers said, “Pope Francis spoke out today in favor of wage equality for women—continuing the Catholic Church’s long history of being fair to women. Lady priests get the same as man priests.”

Neither joke was Maher-like obscene, and indeed they did not cross the line. Here’s the problem: they help foster invidious stereotypes. These guys need to get up to date.

For example, Orthodox Jewish rabbis refuse to sit next to women (save for their wives) on an airplane, causing all kinds of problems. When these rabbis meet in places such as Citi Field, over 50,000 show up, but there are no women: they are banned from attending. As for Muslim women, well, where do I begin?

This doesn’t go on once and a while—it goes on all the time. It’s time the writers for these shows practiced equality and decided whether to treat Catholics like Jews and Muslims, or Jews and Muslims like Catholics. The former is our choice.

Contact Drew Shane (Conan’s PR director): drew.shane@conacotv.com

Contact Lauren Roseman (Seth’s PR director): lauren.roseman@nbcuni.com

Bill Donohue reacts to the news that Renald Luzier, more popularly known as Luz, is not going to draw Muhammad anymore:

Luz became a Hall of Fame cartoonist when he put his portrayal of Muhammad on the cover of Charlie Hebdo in January. Now he is calling it quits: he pledges never to draw the Islamic prophet again, saying “it no longer interests me.”

The man is a coward, a bigot, a pornographer, and a liar.

Luz is a coward because he doesn’t have the guts to follow through on his 15 minutes of fame. He is a bigot because he delights in offending people of faith. He is a pornographer because much of his work is patently obscene. And he is a liar because everyone knows why he really quit.

Had Luz been content to lampoon Muhammad in a conventional way, I would never have condemned him. But he had to get down and dirty and intentionally insult Muslims with his pornographic images. That is why I jumped all over him. Now I have lost respect for him again: he quit for the wrong reason.

Bill Donohue comments on a piece today by an editorial writer for the Kansas City Star:

Yael T. Abouhalkah’s mother should have told her son to mind his own business. He writes for the notoriously anti-Catholic newspaper, the Kansas City Star, and is now lecturing Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas about his decision to have Bishop Robert Finn preside at two ordinations in May; Finn recently resigned as Bishop of Kansas City-St. Joseph, and Naumann is the apostolic administrator of the diocese.

Archbishop Naumann will be celebrating the ordination of priests in his own diocese on the same day that the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph is holding its ordinations. That is why he asked Bishop Finn to preside over his former diocese. As well he should: not only is Bishop Finn a bishop in good standing in the Catholic Church, he is a holy man who has done a magnificent job in securing bright and able men to the priesthood. Indeed, the number of men he has galvanized to become priests makes Finn the envy of bishops in much larger dioceses throughout the nation.

All of this upsets Abouhalkah a great deal. He calls the decision to empower Bishop Finn to preside over the ordinations “repulsive” and “reckless.” I call his condemnation malicious, obscene, and intrusive. Catholics no more report to the Kansas City Star than its employees report to the Catholic Church. We respect those lines. Would that the Star do likewise.

Contact: abouhalkah@kcstar.com

Bill Donohue comments on today’s oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court on same-sex marriage:

The catchy Beatles tune, “Love Is All You Need,” is actually being played out today in the U.S. Supreme Court. Indeed, it is one of the central grounds upon which the case for gay marriage is being made. But in real life, there is a whole lot more to marriage than love.

Not only is love as a basis for marriage a relatively recent phenomenon—most marriages throughout history were arranged or based on duty—it is profoundly detached from the historical purpose of marriage, which is procreation. Once love is given primary status as a condition for marriage, the institution itself is no longer recognizable.

It was love that motivated three men to “marry” in Thailand on Valentine’s Day. As one of the “spouses” said, “Love occurs unconditionally and is not limited to only two people.” Ten years ago, two women and a man “married” in the Netherlands. The man said, “I love both Bianca and Mirjam, so I am marrying them both.” Allen and Patricia Muth tried to marry in Wisconsin in 1997 but were blocked by the courts (they lost again in 2005), even though they have four children together. Allen and Patricia are brother and sister.

If “Love Is All You Need,” then the Muths have been treated unjustly and should be released from prison.

Baltimore Archbishop William Lori, chairman of the bishops’ Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, accurately identifies the problem. He notes that “when you redefine marriage as many people want to do today it becomes more a relationship of affection, an emotional relationship.” He understands that marriage is about families, and that children need a mother and a father—not two mothers or two fathers. Just ask Heather Barwick, who is party to a brief against gay marriage today. She was raised by two mothers, who, though loving, could not give her something she needed, namely, “the need for a father.” Heather is living testimony that “Love Is Not All You Need.”

Bill Donohue comments on the latest episode of “Real Time with Bill Maher” on HBO:

On his Friday night show, Maher lashed out at Pope Francis and Jesus in a particularly vulgar way.

While discussing the Armenian genocide, Maher said, “You know who said it’s a genocide? The pope. The pope was like f*** yeah it’s a genocide. The pope has huge balls. You would too if you were 78 and never had sex.”

Maher’s assault on the Eucharist was vile. He spoke about a toaster that can customize a burnt image of your face on it. When an image of Jesus was shown on the screen, Maher asked, “What kind of needy loner says, ‘hey look at that bread you’re eating, it’s really me.'”

Maher does what he does because a) he is an unrelenting bigot b) HBO officials allow him to trash Catholicism with impunity and, c) Catholics will not threaten to kill him. Since neither the first nor the third reason is going to change, that leaves it to HBO to finally act responsibly.

Contact Keith Cocozza, Senior VP Communications, Time Warner:
Keith.Cocozza@timewarner.com

Bill Donohue comments on Hillary Clinton’s remarks yesterday at the Women in the World Summit in New York City:

It was not surprising that Hillary Clinton, who strongly opposes a ban on partial-birth abortion, would tell her feminist audience that she supports Planned Parenthood. What was surprising was her comment on the need to change religious beliefs on abortion. Here is what she said:

“Yes, we’ve cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health [read: abortion] and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will and deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.” (My italics.)

In other words, Hillary has a problem with the Catholic Church’s teachings on abortion—they must be changed.

Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church’s teachings on abortion. It’s time for Hillary to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.

Contact: info@readyforhillary.com

Bill Donohue comments on Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal’s op-ed in today’s New York Times:

Governor Bobby Jindal is more than a practicing Catholic—he is a man who will not change his “faith-driven view” of marriage, even if other public officials are willing to do so. Nor should he. His statement today on behalf of marriage (properly understood) and conscience rights is superb. He is both a defender of religious liberty and an opponent of unjust discrimination.

Jindal is going to pursue legislation that would insulate individuals and institutions from government coercion on the subject of marriage. To be exact, he would allow them to exercise their deeply held religious convictions on the institution of marriage with impunity. Nothing he is proposing would create a new right to discriminate: gays and lesbians would live as freely as they do now. What would change is the authority of the government to invoke sanctions against those who hold to the Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage, and who do not want to affirm alternatives to it.

Perhaps the boldest, and most refreshing, part of Jindal’s essay is his willingness to publicly chastise corporations: from Wal-Mart to Wall Street they have jumped on board the gay-marriage bandwagon, thus aligning themselves with the traditional enemies of religious liberty.

The problem with many Republicans, and some conservatives, is that they are only committed to Two “M’s”: markets and missiles. To be sure, a market economy is vastly superior to socialism, and a strong national defense is critical to the maintenance of a free society. But there is a Third “M” that is also indispensable: morality. A free society depends as much on the virtue of its citizens as it does any factor.

Governor Jindal embraces the Three “M’s.” He gets it. Hopefully he will inspire others to get it as well.

Bill Donohue discusses how offensive conduct is treated these days:

There was a time when conduct deemed to be offensive, especially of a sexual nature, was condemned by everyone. But not today: what matters is the identity of the offender, not the conduct.

Yesterday, David Letterman warmed up his audience by making a joke about women. He said, “Treat a lady like a whore, and a whore like a lady.” The audience didn’t think this was funny, so he dropped it.

Yesterday, three Orthodox rabbis from New Jersey were convicted of conspiracy to commit kidnapping. They were charged with forcing unwilling Jewish men to get a divorce (known as a get), using electric cattle prods and handcuffs to torture them.

Yesterday, young women went topless in Times Square—they were body-painted from the waist up—hustling young men on the street to have their picture taken with them, for cash. They accosted minors. A tour guide complained that this was child pornography, but others thought it was cute.

Letterman tells obscene jokes about priests on a regular basis, and even though the audience does not always approve, he never stops.

The New York Times never misses an opportunity to write about a wayward priest—they have done stories about a priest who grabbed the behind of a teenager while wrestling—yet no reporter was assigned to do a story about the torturing rabbis, either yesterday or during the trial.

Going naked in the street has never triggered outrage from most of those in the mainstream media, yet when a disturbed priest takes offensive pictures of children who are fully clothed (they were crotch-shots), it is labeled “pornographic” (see today’s Times story on Bishop Finn).

In other words, what is considered offensive these days depends on who the offender is, not the behavior.

Bill Donohue comments on those who are rejoicing over the resignation of Bishop Robert Finn:

In 2002, Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland retired after it was disclosed that he paid $450,000—ripped off from the coffers that service the poor—to his boyfriend; Weakland was accused of raping him years earlier.

Weakland’s multiple offenses, all serious, have not deterred Catholic left-wing malcontents, particularly those at Commonweal, from showering him with praise. Even Weakland’s stunning revelation, made in 2009, that he did not know it was a crime to sexually molest a child, had no effect: his fans were unfazed. That’s because he is a man of the Left. Bishop Finn, however, is entitled to no slack. That’s because he is an orthodox bishop.

Some of Bishop Finn’s critics have been fair, but many have not. Among the latter are the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), attorneys Jeffrey Anderson and Rebecca Randles, and Judy Thomas of the Kansas City Star. They make a good tag-team. Randles, by the way, subsequently sued me and the Catholic League over a bogus libel accusation. But she lost: it was dismissed by the courts on all counts.

In 2011, we submitted a proposed full-page ad to the Kansas City Star that I had written; the cost was $25,000. But once the editors read it, they turned it down. That’s because I had gotten too close to home, exposing their allies for who they are.

It is worth reading the ad that the Kansas City Star did not want you to read (click here.) It wasn’t worth $25,000 to allow me to tell the truth. Bishop Finn may have made mistakes, but he looks positively angelic next to these people.