Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the problem Sen. Kamala Harris will have with Catholics:

Once Catholic voters learn more about Kamala Harris’ positions on an array of moral issues, Joe Biden’s vice presidential pick will have a hard time winning them over.

To begin with, Harris has tainted herself with the brush of anti-Catholicism. In 2018, she sought to stop a Trump nominee for a seat on the federal bench simply because he was Catholic. In doing so, she invoked a religious test for the bench, a patently unconstitutional act.

Here is how I characterized the Catholic League’s effort to help the nominee for a federal district job; my remarks were published in the Catholic League’s “2019 Year in Review.”We were among the first to come to bat for [Brian] Buescher, and our effort paid off. After much haggling, he was seated on the court in August [2019].”

The day after Christmas, 2018, I unloaded on Harris for questioning the suitability of Buescher for the job. His offense? His affiliation with the Knights of Columbus. She objected to his membership in the Knights because it is pro-life. Of course it is—it is a Catholic entity. In short, her real target was the Catholic Church.

Her craving for abortion rights is so strong that in 2019 she bludgeoned pro-life activist David Daleiden for his undercover video work showing how abortion operatives harvest and sell aborted fetal organs. Unlike the American people, the vast majority of whom want restrictions on abortion, Harris insists there should be none. She led the fight against a 20-week abortion ban.

Last September, following a Democratic presidential candidate debate, Harris criticized ABC panelists for not asking about abortion. The debate, she said, “was three hours long and not one question about abortion or reproductive rights.” She is so pro-abortion that in 2015, in her capacity as California’s Attorney General, she sought to cripple crisis pregnancy centers with draconian regulations. She was sued and lost in the Supreme Court three years later.

Catholics will be delighted to know that Harris is a co-sponsor of “The Equality Act,” legislation that would effectively gut Catholic hospitals. As the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said, it would put freedom of speech, belief, and thought “at risk,” thus vitiating conscience rights. It would also disable the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, making mince meat out of religious liberty.

Harris’ passion for gay rights led her to become the keynote speaker at the 2017 Human Rights Campaign dinner, the prominent homosexual entity. She thrilled the crowd, saying, “Together we’ll fight when Planned Parenthood clinics are being threatened to shut down.” The audience was ecstatic when she boasted that she “felt patriotic when on Valentine’s weekend in 2004, I performed marriages of gay couples at San Francisco Hall.”

What about men who think they are women, and vice versa? She’s fine with that. Do they belong in the military? Sure. What about biological males who think they are girls competing against real girls in girls’ sports? She loves it.

Harris’ persona is something to keep an eye on. She will fight to the end of the earth to keep black kids trapped in public schools, denying them the same school choice options she has exercised. Yet her stepchildren attended an elite private school in Los Angeles, Wildwood School, that costs about $44,000 a year. She made sure not to stick them in a public school.

If this shows her classist streak, her penchant for believing any sexual allegation made against men shows her sexist side. When Supreme Court nominee Bret Kavanaugh testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Harris said about Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations, “I believe her.” That was before Kavanaugh testified. A year later, after Ford’s tale was blown wide open, Harris tweeted that Kavanaugh “lied.”

Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax is another man whom Harris smeared. When he was charged with sexual assault, she immediately labeled it a “credible account.” The accusation died on the vine. He still has his job.

More seriously, when her running mate was charged with sexual assault last year, Harris said of his accusers, “I believe them and I respect them being able to tell their story and having the courage to do it.” She has never taken that back. Does she still believe Biden is a predator? If she hasn’t changed her mind, what does that make her?

Finally, Harris supports reparations for African Americans. That would not include her: her father is Jamaican and her mother was born in India. So she wouldn’t get a dime. But she would have to fork up lots of cash. Why? As her father disclosed—he is a Stanford University professor—one of her ancestors, Hamilton Brown, was a slave owner.

In fairness, then, if the average American has to pay X amount for slavery, Harris should at least have to pay 10X. Isn’t this what redistributive justice is all about? Catholics need to know.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Black Lives Matter:

One of the greatest threats to the health and safety of black Americans today is not the police. It is Black Lives Matter. The facts are incontrovertible.

Crime is a serious problem in many black inner-city neighborhoods, and that is why a recent Gallup survey found that most blacks—81 percent—want the police to spend the same amount of time (61 percent) or more time (20 percent) in their area. If most blacks thought the cops were the enemy, they would not want a police presence where they live.

Why is Black Lives Matter such a threat to the health and safety of black people? Because it wants to eliminate the police force and empty the prisons. If this were to happen, blacks would suffer the most.

On the website of Black Lives Matter there is a petition calling for “a national defunding of police.” While others are also calling to defund the police, Black Lives Matter is front and center.

Patrisse Cullors is one of the three founders of Black Lives Matter; she is also its most prominent spokesperson. She recently told Newsweek that “Policing and incarceration are part of a continuum,” and that her organization is committed to “getting rid of both systems.” She added that “When we’re thinking about defunding police, we need to be thinking about defunding the mass incarceration state.”

On its website, Black Lives Matter lists “prison abolition” as one of its objectives. In June, Black Lives Matter Chicago said this goal was urgent. “We say #DefundThePolice and #DefundDepOfCorrections because they work in tandem. The rise of mass incarceration occurred alongside the rise of militarized and mass policing. They must be abolished as a system.”

Chicago, of course, is where black lives matter the least: black-on-black shootings are routine, especially on weekends. Most Chicagoan blacks, like blacks everywhere, are peaceful, which explains why they want more arrests and more incarcerations, not less. So why is Black Lives Matter doing everything it can to subvert the aspirations of black people?

One reason why we have gotten to this absurd stage is because of the white “allies” of Black Lives Matter. To be specific, legions of young affluent white men and women have been intellectually seduced by their ideologically corrupt professors. They sincerely believe that the cops are the enemy and the prisons are evil. They need a reality check.

In truth, it is they, along with Black Lives Matter, who are the greatest threat to the health and safety of black people.

If we get rid of the police and the prisons, Black Lives Matter officials will be unaffected, as will their white allies; they live in comfortable neighborhoods. It will be innocent black men, women and children who will pay the price for their insanity. It doesn’t get any more perverse than this. Indeed, the Klan could not improve on their agenda.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a New York Times column attacking St. Serra:

On September 23, 2015, Pope Francis canonized Junípero Serra, the 18th century Spanish priest who courageously defended the human rights of Indians in North America.

A week later the New York Times maligned St. Serra in a front-page story by Laura M. Holson, “Sainthood of Serra Reopens Wounds in Colonialism in California.” She said that “Historians agree that he [Serra] forced Native Americans to abandon their tribal culture and convert to Christianity, and that he had them whipped and imprisoned and sometimes worked or tortured to death.”

This was a bald-face lie. As I will show, the newspaper’s response to my criticism was astoundingly unconvincing. Now this same accusation appears in a New York Times online opinion column by Elizabeth Bruenig, “American Catholics and Black Lives Matter.”

Bruenig writes that Serra’s “eager participation in the conquest of North America” included “torture, enslavement and murder of some of the Native Americans he intended to convert.” Note that she embellishes the lies that Holson told.

On the same day that Holson’s news story was published in the newspaper, September 30, 2015, I emailed her the following: “You said that ‘Historians agree’ that Fr. Serra had Indians ‘tortured to death.’ I have done research on Serra and written about him, yet I know of no historian who makes such a claim. Please name them. I can name many who never made such a claim.”

When Holson did not respond, I contacted the “Corrections” section on October 1 asking for a correction; I also contacted the public editor.

“This is a serious issue: when a reporter blithely says that ‘Historians agree,’ readers take it that there is at least a consensus among historians about the subject. But such is not the case on this issue. The only persons given to such an accusation are radical activists, not professional scholars.” I even emailed a list of “the most authoritative books on Fr. Serra.” I pointed out that not one of the authors whom I cited ever accused Serra of torture.

After a week went by, with no response, I wrote the newspaper again. I asked if someone could “name the historians who say Fr. Serra tortured Indians.” Finally, I received a response from Gregory E. Brock, Senior Editor for Standards at the New York Times.

Brock said the editors had discussed my complaint but were waiting for Holson to return from Oregon (she was doing a story about a shooting) before contacting me. Fine. Then he got specific. His response is a gem.

“Certainly you have very strong views on this issue and have written extensively about it. But after many discussions, a review of past Times coverage and other resources, I agree with Ms. Holson’s editors that ‘historians’ is accurate, and therefore no correction is required.

“At one point you sent us a list of books you considered to be ‘the authoritative books on Fr. Serra.’ Ms. Holson had already reviewed the writings of some of the historians you cited in that list.

“If I thought having an extended conversation on this would help, I would be happy to. But after re-reading your correspondence, I cannot think of anything we could do or say that would convince you that our coverage was fair and complete—or that the reference to ‘historians’ is accurate.”

Brock ended by saying, “rest assured that your points have been thoroughly reviewed and a great deal of time has been put into making this decision.”

Here is how I responded.

“Thank you for taking my complaint seriously. I have just one question: Who are the ‘historians’ who claim that Fr. Serra tortured Indians?”

This was the end of our correspondence. They were caught in a lie and did not have the courage to admit it. And now they are smearing St. Serra again.

To read my account of the saintly priest, “The Noble Legacy of Fr. Serra,” click here. To read the exchange that I had with the Times in 2015, click here.

We will send this news release to the paper’s news and opinion editors. We ask you to contact Bruenig.

Contact: elizabeth.bruenig@gmail.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the need for the Defense Department to stand up for religious liberty:

Sen. Ted Cruz is absolutely right in noting that the Department of Defense is not being aggressive enough defending religious liberty in the armed forces.

To read my letter to Defense Secretary Mark Esper, click here.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on how politics has made its way into journalism:

The Associated Press’ new “style book” goes beyond trendy: It has joined the social justice crusade. By referring to white people in the lowercase, and black people in the uppercase—”white” and “Black”—AP is wearing its politics on its sleeve. Others, such as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, have already followed suit. CNN and Fox News, however, have decided to capitalize white as well.

It’s the reasoning that matters most. According to AP, “white people in general have much less shared history and culture.” The New York Times agrees, saying, “White doesn’t represent a shared culture and history in the way Black does.”

The journalists should leave sociology to us sociologists.

It is certainly true that white people do not have a shared culture and history—the experiences of the Irish and the Germans are very different. It is also true that no white person thinks of himself as a white person: his identity is rooted in his ethnicity, not his race. But contrary to what the journalists think, blacks also have no shared culture and history.

There are black Puerto Ricans and blond Puerto Ricans. Those from the West Indies may be black, but this racial term has no meaning. In Africa, no one identifies as a black man any more than the Italians think of themselves as white people. Moreover, those who live in Italy identify on the basis of their region, not their ethnicity. Africans identify on the basis of their tribe or clan, and in some cases by their nationality; they do not identify on the basis of their race.

In the United States, there were free blacks and slave blacks. Some free blacks owned black slaves. It is silly to maintain that these black people have a shared history and culture.

Asians have no shared history or culture, either. Not only are there huge differences between the Chinese and the Vietnamese (they have been at war with each other dating back to 111 B.C.), within China distinctions are drawn between the Han and the Hakka; regional identities are also crucial. So should we use upper or lowercase to refer to these “people of color” (another meaningless term)?

Mexicans consider themselves Mexicans, not Hispanics, just as Chileans consider themselves Chileans. Spaniards are very particular about being known as Spaniards, and do not take kindly to being lumped in with Latinos, a term that is more generic than behaviorally meaningful.

There are Japanese Jews and Argentinean Jews. There are Sephardic Jews and Ashkenazic Jews. Are Jews a race? No. Are they an ethnic group? Only in the sense that they have, what sociologist Milton Gordon called, “a shared sense of peoplehood.”

Colin Powell is often called African American, yet his parents immigrated from Jamaica. Susan Rice’s maternal grandparents also came from Jamaica. Barack Obama’s father was African but his mother was white. Why is he called African American? In nations such as Israel, a person’s identity is determined by the mother. That would make him a white man. Kamala Harris’ mother is Tamil Indian and her father is from Jamaica, so why does her Wikipedia page say she is “the second African American woman” to serve in the U.S. Senate? She clearly is not.

The media can do whatever they want, but they should not expect us to respect their reasoning. The games they are playing are rooted in politics, not linguistics.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Bible burning in Portland:

On August 1, sometime after midnight, anarchists in Portland once again burned the American flag. But this time they did something different: they engaged in book burning. The book they chose was the Bible.

We’ve waited a few days to see how many media outlets would report on what happened. One did. There was not a single mention of it on any of the broadcast or cable TV news shows. And aside from the New York Post, no newspaper in the nation covered it. The only mention of it was on the internet; a few TV commentators noted it as well.

Had it been the Quran that was burned, it is a sure bet the media would have been all over it. Burning Islamic holy books would be considered intolerant. But burning the Bible is not, and in some quarters may even be seen as meritorious.

Besides the media blackout, the larger issue for Americans is what the Bible burnings represent. What happened last weekend in Portland was a mini-Hitlerian event, plain and simple.

On May 10, 1933, 40,000 people gathered in Berlin to hear Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels instruct university students to burn books deemed offensive to the regime. They proceeded to burn 25,000 volumes, including those written by Brecht, Einstein, Freud, and Hemingway.

During Mao’s Zedong’s Cultural Revolution, 1966-76, the Communists went on a tear burning books that undermined their efforts at thought control. That was then. Now book burning is back with a vengeance: books were burned last December and as recently as last month. Reports have surfaced saying the Communists are “burning books and burying Confucian scholars.”

Why are the young people, most of whom are white, burning the Bible in Portland? For the same reason fascists and communists burn books—to cleanse society of any thought that is contrary to theirs.

Rebecca Knuth is the author of two books on this subject. Books are burned, she says, because they “are an embodiment of ideas and if you hold extreme beliefs you cannot tolerate anything that contradicts those beliefs or is in competition with them.” She says that by burning books, “you are destroying your enemy and your enemy’s beliefs.”

The enemy of the Portland Hitlerians is American society, which is why they burn the flag. They also hate the Judeo-Christian ethos upon which it is based, which is why they burn the Bible.

What do they offer as an alternative? Nothing. They are intellectually spent, morally bankrupt and culturally deracinated. That is why they resort to nihilism. The only thing they have going for them are their allies in the media.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue wrote the following letter to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) today:

August 3, 2020

Hon. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
229 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Rep. Ocasio-Cortez:

Without provocation, you recently exploded in a fit of rage when you condemned Father Damien, the 19th century priest who gave his life to serving lepers on the Hawaiian island of Molokai. Referring to a statue of him in the U.S. Capitol, you said, “This is what patriarchy and white supremacist culture looks like!”

Your remarks evince an offensive ethnocentrism. You disrespected the people of Hawaii: It is they who hold Father Damien in high regard. You should be careful not to judge a people’s culture and history through your own provincial lens.

Here is what the Britannica Online Encyclopedia says about Father Damien.

“Damien, known for his compassion, provided spiritual, physical, and emotional comfort to those suffering from the debilitating and incurable disease. He served as both pastor and physician to the [leper] colony and undertook many projects to better the conditions there. He improved water and food supplies and housing and founded two orphanages, receiving help from other priests for only 6 of his 16 years on Molokai.”

Even after Father Damien learned that he had contracted leprosy, he continued his charitable work. He died in 1889.

You expressed anger at the failure of the U.S. Capitol not to recognize a contemporary of Father Damien, Queen Liliuokalani. It is obvious that you know no more about the queen than the priest.

Queen Liliuokalani adored Father Damien, heralding his yeoman work. Indeed, she made the “white supremacist” a knight commander of the Royal Order of Kalākaua for his legendary work with lepers. In fact, as a public tribute to his efforts, she convinced government officials to build a hospital for lepers.

Your appalling ethnocentrism makes it impossible for you to appreciate why Father Damien is regarded as a hero by Hawaiians. That is why they made sure to have three statues of him: one in front of the State Capitol in downtown Honolulu; one in front of St. Joseph’s Church in Molokai; and one in National Statuary Hall in Washington, D.C.

You need to apologize to the people of Hawaii for disrespecting their history and culture. You also need to apologize to Catholics for demonizing Father Damien (it matters not a whit that you identify as a Catholic—you have offended Catholics and that is all that counts).

Sincerely,

William A. Donohue, Ph.D.
President

Contact AOC’s chief of staff, Ariel Eckblad: ariel.eckblad@mail.house.gov