Bill Donohue comments on the feminist reaction to “Fifty Shades of Grey”:

Type “Fifty Shades of Grey” in the search engine of the National Organization for Women and up comes, “Sorry, No Results.” Type it in the search engine of the Feminist Majority and it says, “Sorry, no content matched your criteria.” Similarly, the Feminist Majority Foundation delivers, “No results.” And while there are passing references to the book in the pages of Ms. magazine, there is no review of the movie, nor is there any mention of the book or film in 2015.

So what are they talking about in these feminist quarters? Abortion. That’s the big issue. They also like to talk about LGBT issues. So given their interest in sex—the needs of mothers never crosses their mind—what accounts for their silence on “Fifty Shades”?

Nominally speaking, the physical and psychological exploitation of Ana in “Fifty Shades” by her control-freak friend, Christian, should be ripe material for feminists. But their reticence makes sense once we understand what really drives them: sex without consequences. For straights, this means abortion rights. For gays, it means a cure for HIV/AIDS. In other words, they want to indulge their sexual passions without being burdened by babies and diseases. Most of all, they do not want to be judged.

So there you have it. To condemn “Fifty Shades”—even by focusing on how it invites men to treat women as their sex slaves—is to invite judgment on matters sexual. And there is no bigger taboo in the world than that.

Sorry, gals, but today’s feminists prize a value-free world more than your well-being.

Bill Donohue comments on this morning’s edition of “Imus in the Morning” that was simulcast on the Fox Business Network:

Imus has long made fun of Catholics, especially the clergy, and most of the time he has hit above the belt. Over the past year or so, however, he has gotten nastier. On today’s show, he allowed one of his sidekicks, Rob Bartlett, to engage in an extended rant, pretending to speak as Pope Francis. It was a mixed bag: some of it was funny; some of it was plain stupid; and some of it crossed the line.

It is not clear whether it is Bartlett’s ignorance or malice that best explains his ugly comparison of bondage, domination, and sadomasochism—ala “Fifty Shades of Grey”—to mortification, a method of Christian asceticism practiced by some Catholics in service to virtuous living. Either way, he unnecessarily offended Catholics.

Hopefully, Imus will not push his Catholic-baiting envelope too far.

Contact the Don Imus show: donimus@foxbusiness.com

Bill Donohue comments on the killing of three Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina:

Craig Stephen Hicks turned himself in after shooting three young Muslims near the campus of the University of North Carolina. Hicks is a rabid atheist who is known for his hatred of Christianity and Islam. Indeed, he saw the two religions as similar. He recently asked on his Facebook page “why radical Christians and radical Muslims are so opposed to each others’ influence when they agree about so many ideological issues.”

Hicks is a big fan of British atheist Richard Dawkins. Dawkins condemned the killings but he said nothing about Hicks’ atheism or his influence on him. Dawkins needs to open up about this issue. Hicks supports Atheists for Equality and other gay activist associations. Similarly, we need to know more about this linkage.

Facebook Likes listed by Hicks include the Southern Poverty Law Center and Freedom from Religion Foundation.

The Southern Poverty Law Center specializes in naming individuals and groups that allegedly promote hate speech. It lists Dr. Ben Carson, a respectable conservative activist, and the Family Research Council, a respectable conservative organization, as haters. It would be instructive to know why it thinks that Hicks, a true hater, was drawn to its work.

Freedom from Religion Foundation has a moral obligation to speak up. After all, it spends most of its time demonizing religion. What might Hicks have learned from them?

We also need to know why the Associated Press and the New York Times, unlike all other media outlets, refuse to mention the killer’s atheism. Had Hicks been a Catholic activist, they would be highlighting the connection.

Bill Donohue comments on an attempt to assassinate Pope Francis:

Yesterday, the former Philippine National Police (PNP) chief, Getulio Pascua Napenas, testified before the Philippine Senate about terrorist activities. He discussed how Zulkifli bin Hir, a.k.a. Marwan, planned to assassinate Pope Francis during his recent trip to the Philippines.

“Just recently,” Napenas said, “during Pope Francis’ visit to the Philippines, we have information that Jemaah Islamiyah [Al Queda’s regional arm], in coordination with Marwan, had planned to construct a bomb to be detonated as the papal convoy drove down T.M. Kalaw Street in Manila on January 18, 2015. These reports were not confirmed neither admitted nor denied by the PNP. The fact, however, remains that there exists this information.”

The military received information about the planned assassination and altered the route of the papal motorcade. Marwan was killed on January 25 in a police operation.

Napenas identified who Marwan was. “Marwan was the maker of bombs delivered for usage to several terrorist groups like the Abu Sayyaf. He was a well-known supplier of bombs of various terrorist groups. He was also teaching terrorists how to create bombs….Marwan was also in charge of the Southeast Asian and Indonesian terrorist group Kumpulan Mujahidin Malaysia or KMM. The KMM is a part of the international terrorist organization, Jemaah Islamiyah or JI, of which Marwan was believed to be part of its central command.”

“In other words,” Napenas said, “Zulkifli bin Hir a.k.a. Marwan is the most notorious bomb expert not just here in Southeast Asia but also in the entire world. This is the reason why he was named one of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s most wanted men in the world after the fall of Osama bin Laden.”

Two quick points: a) The absence of media coverage of this assassination attempt on the pope is startling, and b) the curse of radical Islam is a worldwide evil that must be destroyed.

“Fifty Shades of Grey” will debut in some theaters on February 13; it opens wide on Valentine’s Day. The movie is based on the best-selling book by that name, authored by British writer E.L. James. It features a young woman who submits to being beaten by a man.

Bishop Richard J. Malone, Chairman of the Bishops’ Conference Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth, says that while the book and film “are marketed as a romantic story,” it is really nothing more than a “graphic portrayal of a young woman agreeing to be abused and degraded in a sexual relationship.”

Cincinnati Archbishop Dennis M. Schnurr has joined with the Religious Alliance Against Pornography in condemning the movie. “The story line is presented as a romance, however, the underlying theme is that bondage, domination, and sadomasochism [BDSM] are normal and pleasurable.”

Bill Donohue, drawing on his experience as a sociologist, agrees with these assessments, and offers his own analysis. Because of the nature of the conduct that constitutes BDSM, readers should know in advance that his article is itself a graphic depiction of some very real, though sick, behaviors. To read it, click here.

Bill Donohue comments on remarks made by Pope Francis on parents who spank their children:

Aside from a few snide comments, most of the media coverage has been fair. But some activist groups have predictably overreacted. Before others jump on board, consider the following.

In his weekly address in St. Peter’s Square on Wednesday, Pope Francis spoke about the merits of being a good father. “One time, I heard a father in a meeting with married couples say, ‘I sometimes have to smack my children a bit, but never in the face so as not to humiliate them.'” He then added, “How beautiful! He knows the sense of dignity! He has to punish them but does it justly and moves on.”

Fr. Thomas Rosica, a Vatican spokesman, responded to criticism with bluntness. “It’s about time that we stop and allow the pope to speak the language of most ordinary people, especially parents, who understand the pope far better than those who parse every single word and statement that comes out of his mouth!”

It is also important to consider other remarks the pope made this week about children. In a letter about abusive priests that was released yesterday, the pope said, “There is absolutely no place in ministry for those who abuse minors.” Yesterday afternoon he spoke to disabled children: “Each one of us has a treasure inside. What I want to say is don’t hide the treasure that each one of you has.”

It is obvious that Pope Francis makes a profound distinction between abusing children and ordinary parental discipline. Moreover, he prizes all children equally.

There is no doubt in my mind that if the pope had endorsed spanking as a worthwhile S&M exercise, the fans of “Fifty Shades of Grey” would be breaking out their whips in celebration. More on this subject next week.

Bill Donohue comments on remarks made today by President Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast:

In an attempt to deflect guilt from Muslim madmen, President Obama said, “Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.” Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious.

The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages. Here is how Princeton scholar and Islamic expert Bernard Lewis puts it: “At the present time, the Crusades are often depicted as an early expansionist imperialism—a prefigurement of the modern European countries. To people of the time, both Muslim and Christian, they were no such thing.” So what were they? “The Crusade was a delayed response to the jihad, the holy war for Islam, and its purpose was to recover by war what had been lost by war—to free the holy places of Christendom and open them once again, without impediment, to Christian pilgrimage.”

Regarding the other fable, the Inquisition, the Catholic Church had almost nothing to do with it. The Church saw heretics as lost sheep who needed to be brought back into the fold. By contrast, secular authorities saw heresy as treason; anyone who questioned royal authority, or who challenged the idea that kingship was God-given, was guilty of a capital offense. It was they—not the Church—who burned the heretics. Indeed, secular authorities blasted the Church for its weak role in the Inquisition.

According to St. Louis University and Crusade scholar Thomas Madden, “All the Crusades met the criteria of just wars.” How many ISIS atrocities, Mr. President, have met the criteria of just wars? The ones where they buried people alive, stoned children, raped women, and crucified men? Moreover, according to Henry Kamen, the leading authority on the Inquisition, a total of 1,394 people were killed during the Inquisition. Today, Muslim madmen kill more than that in a few months.

The President should apologize for his insulting comparison.

Bill Donohue comments on the spike in assisted-suicide bills:

On New Year’s Day, I told EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo my prediction for 2015: doctor-assisted suicide would become a raging moral issue. Looks like my prediction was on target: California, Maryland, New York, and Colorado are all considering bills that would legalize it.

A few weeks ago, California lawmakers introduced a bill that would allow a patient to request life-ending medical assistance if he has six months or less to live. Lawmakers in Maryland are introducing a similar bill this week. Some doctors and terminally ill patients in New York are in court today suing over a law that prevents doctor-assisted suicide; a bill to reverse the law has been proposed. Colorado is weighing its own bill, one that does not require doctors to screen for mental problems.

These bills are inspired by, if not modeled on, Oregon law. That should give them pause. All the talk about “built-in safeguards” has not prevented doctors from killing patients who are not terminally ill. In some cases, patients who have been injected with deadly substances have lived for years, leading macabre physicians to demand a “do over.” Then there are those who have been offered a deadly way out of their condition in lieu of medical treatment.

The disabled are particularly vulnerable under these bills, which is why there is so much push-back coming from this community. What is happening in Colorado—no screening for depression—is ripe for abuse. Colorado is also breaking new ground by allowing patients to pick up their lethal prescription at the drug store and finish themselves at home, giving new meaning to the term “take-out” order.

Euthanasia always starts with the hard cases, but history shows that it never ends there. Beware: We are not stepping on a slippery slope—it’s a sheet of ice.

To read Bill Donohue’s article in Legatus magazine, “The Morality of Doctor-Assisted Suicide,” click here.

Bill Donohue comments on how the Los Angeles Times constructs the news:

On January 17, a crowd of 15,000, many of them young people, took to the streets of Los Angeles to participate in the first “One Life” march, a demonstration in support of the rights of unborn children.

On February 1, 10 people demonstrated outside the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels to protest the proposed canonization of Father Junipero Serra, the priest who brought Christianity to California.

Guess which event the Los Angeles Times ignored and which one it covered?

Across the nation, the Washington Post covered the Los Angeles pro-life march, and the newswire in Times Square highlighted it. But the L.A. Times effectively censored it, even though the demonstration was held one block from its headquarters. Its omission of this huge event, and its flagging of the tiny protest, are a reflection of its politics: the Times is pro-abortion and not exactly Catholic-friendly.

The non-event protest was the work of the ill-named Mexica Movement. In fact, there is no movement: there is just a handful of Christian-bashing, European-hating activists. In 2000, a Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, counted a “few dozen members” who showed up to protest Elton Johns’ appearance at Tower Records in Los Angeles (he allegedly sang a “racist song” on the soundtrack of the film, “The Road to El Dorado”). In other words, 15 years ago this rag-tag group marshaled more activists than it did last Sunday. Some “movement.”

The few who protested Father Serra showed how low-class they are when they compared the priest to the devil and Los Angeles Archbishop José Gomez to Hitler. For good reasons, Gomez is well-liked by minorities, though his few detractors garner the news. Shame on the L.A. Times for profiling them.

Contact L.A. Times editor Davan Maharaj: davan.maharaj@latimes.com