Catholic League president Bill Donohue addresses Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel’s war on Catholics:

Why is Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continuing her harassment of the Catholic Church? That is what her latest investigation of clergy sexual abuse amounts to, hunting for guilty priests going back over 70 years ago in the Diocese of Marquette. The record shows that this  is not an anomaly.

Nessel’s animus against Catholics is palpable and well documented.

She wasn’t in office for two months before she put Catholics on notice: if they were asked by law enforcement about clergy sexual abuse, they should “ask to see their badge, not their rosary.” She couldn’t wait to get the Catholic Church and intimidate Catholics.

Even before Nessel took office on January 1, 2019, she started her war on Catholics. She flat out said she would not enforce a religious liberty bill that protected the religious freedom of faith-based foster care and adoption services. In fact, she said those Catholics who disagreed with her were part of a “radical fringe” and were “hate mongers.”

Less than three months after she took office, Nessel made good on her anti-Catholic pledge, partnering with the ACLU of Michigan to challenge these Catholic services for children. Indeed, she said she would not defend this state law. In a settlement, she decreed that the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services must end state contracts with faith-based agencies.

Nessel got her comeuppance later in the year when a federal district court judge upheld the religious freedom of St. Vincent Catholic Charities, a  foster care and adoption agency. District court judge Robert Jonker explained in his 32-page ruling that in 2015 the Michigan legislature enacted a law upholding the right of faith-based agencies to adhere to the teachings of their Church.

Jonker wrote that Nessel’s 2018 campaign, coupled with her statements as attorney general, “create a strong inference that the State’s real target is the religious beliefs and confessions of St. Vincent, and not discriminatory conduct.”

Moreover, the judge said, she sought to terminate the state’s contract “simply because St. Vincent adheres to its sincerely held religious belief that marriage is an institution created by God to join a single man to a single woman.” Furthermore, this “strongly suggests that the State’s real goal is not to promote non-discriminatory child placements, but to stamp out St. Vincent’s religious belief” and replace it “with a State-orthodoxy test that prevents Catholic believers from participating.”

“All of this,” he concluded, “supports a strong inference that St. Vincent was targeted based on its religious belief, and that it was Defendant Nessel who targeted it.”

The judge said Nessel’s policy—which would “flout the letter and stated intention of the Michigan legislature”—“actually undermines the state’s stated goal of preventing discriminatory conduct and maximizing available placements for children.”

“Shuttering St. Vincent would create significant disruption for the children in its care, who already face an unpredictable home life and benefit from stability,” Jonker said. “It would also hurt the foster and adoptive parents who rely on St. Vincent for support and would have to find new resources.”

It is not just this judge, and the Catholic League, that have noted Nessel’s anti-Catholic bigotry. She no sooner took office when Michigan State Rep. Beau LaFave went after her for retweeting a statement citing the hiring of a retired judge by Michigan State University to address sexual abuse. The tweet in question noted his ties to the Catholic Church.   LaFave further noted Nessel’s previous comments attacking Catholicism.

Nessel’s latest attack on the Catholic Church—her vacuous report on the Diocese of Marquette—is a reflection of who she is.

There is no room for bigots in public life.

Contact Nessel’s Office: agpress@michigan.gov

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the release of a report on accused priests in the Diocese of Marquette issued by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel:

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has issued the most vacuous report, “Diocese of Marquette: A Complete Accounting,” on clergy sexual abuse ever written. We know she has been out to get the Catholic Church, but this effort makes her look incompetent, as well as unethical.

The probe of Catholic dioceses searching for instances of clergy sexual abuse began in 2018 under her predecessor, Bill Schuette; she took the reins in 2019. There has been no attempt to investigate the sexual abuse of minors by ministers, rabbis, imams or school teachers. Just Catholic priests.

This amounts to Catholic profiling. Make no mistake, this is no less invidious than a probe of violent crime would be if it only targeted African Americans. Such a selective approach smacks of bigotry.

After spending a massive amount of the taxpayer’s money, here is what Nessel found.

Her report details alleged cases of priestly sexual abuse that began in 1950. That’s when Harry Truman was president and the Korean War began.

After receiving 52 tips, 16 of which came from the Diocese of Marquette, lawyers combed through 74,000 documents related to the Diocese. Additionally, they went through nearly 862,000 electronic documents looking for dirt.

What they found was scratch. A grand total of 44 priests had allegations made against them since 1950. While one molesting priest is too many, how many religious or secular institutions—where adults regularly interact with minors—and are roughly the size of the Marquette Diocese, could honestly say they have a better record than this? We don’t know because Nessel has no interest in finding out.

It is important to note the limitations of this report as even acknowledged by its authors. [The emphasis is in the original.]

“The allegations are summarized here, and their inclusion does not reflect a determination by the Department [of the Attorney General] that the allegations are credible or otherwise substantiated.”

In other words, the accused did not have a chance to rebut the charges. There’s a good reason for this—32 of the 44 priests are “known or presumed to be dead.” Moreover only 6 of the 44 cases have been substantiated by the Diocese. We cannot assume that all the others involve guilty priests.

Nessel knew long ago that this was a fishing expedition. She knew full well that most of the bad guys were dead, yet she persisted in her mad search for guilty priests.

In 2002, the U.S. bishops instituted the Dallas Charter, a comprehensive effort to monitor and report on instances of clergy sexual abuse in every diocese and eparchy in the country. It has been a smashing success. As I recounted in my book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes, the number of substantiated cases against the clergy has dropped to the single digits each year.

Further proof that the Church has reformed itself can be seen in reading Nessel’s report. It says, “the vast majority of sexual misconduct was alleged to have occurred before 2002.” Indeed, the last alleged case took place in 1997. Importantly, Nessel’s team could find not a single case  where miscreant priests are being protected today.

In our evaluation of the report, we found something else that is consistent  with previous studies on clergy sexual abuse in the Catholic Church.

Approximately 80% of the victims were male, proving once again that this has been a homosexual-driven problem all along. Yet Nessel never mentions this, thus extending the nationwide cover-up. We cannot correct a problem unless we have an accurate diagnosis.

If Nessel were really interested in combating sexual abuse, she would pursue cases of sexual misconduct in the Michigan government with the same kind of doggedness she has shown in hunting down old cases of priestly abuse.

On December 24, 2019, Nessel suspended an investigation into Michigan State University after the college said it would not waive attorney-client privilege regarding her investigation into Larry Nassar, the notorious serial abuser of USA gymnasts and school athletes. When a probe was warranted of similar cases at the University of Michigan in 2020, the school played the same card and she dropped her investigation again.

Moreover, if Nessel were even-handed, she would launch an investigation into the public schools. In 2016, USA Today did a 50-state study of this issue, grading each state on how well they handled this problem. Michigan received an “F” for its failure to adequately address the crisis of sexual abuse in its public schools.

Why hasn’t Nessel done a probe? Is it because she is wedded to the teacher unions? What else could be it?

Nessel’s report makes plain the need to stop her never-ending probe of the Catholic Church (she wants to investigate the other six dioceses in Michigan). It’s time she started going after institutions that have long gotten away with sexual misconduct. She can begin with those on the Michigan payroll.

Contact Nessel’s Office: agpress@michigan.gov

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a European judicial decision that legalized blasphemy against Catholics:

Christmas carols were being sung when a woman walked into Mass, ascended to the altar, naked from the waist up, with pro-abortion slogans all over her body. She then proceeded to “abort” Jesus, holding up pieces of calf liver to symbolize an aborted baby. She completed her blasphemous act by urinating on the altar in front of parishioners.

This 2013 stunt occurred in France. Now the European Court of Human Rights has taken her side, saying she was unjustly found guilty by a French court for an unlawful “sexual display.” The high court said she was merely engaged in freedom of expression, and should never have been prosecuted. Indeed, it ordered the French courts to pay her more than $9,500 in damages, costs, and expenses.

No one has more fully understood this kind of moral depravity better than Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. He spoke eloquently about the “dictatorship of relativism” taking place in the West, a reference to the absence of objective moral truths. What better example than this high court ruling?

He also warned of the dangerous aspects of multiculturalism. It is not, as some have contended, a way of appreciating cultural diversity. No, from the get-go it has been used as a club to destroy our Judeo-Christian heritage.

The European Court of Human Rights proved its hatred for our heritage when it called this vicious act a “performance.”

If this same woman walked into their court, half naked, ascended to the bench, with obscene slogans on her body condemning the judges by name, and then proceeded to defecate on pictures of their mother, would these open-minded wizards call this freedom of expression?

Here’s more proof of their animus against Catholicism. Four years ago it upheld the conviction of a lecturer in Austria who called Mohammad a pedophile for having a sexual relationship with a 9-year-old girl named Aisha.

This court has no legitimacy. It should be disbanded.

Contact Robert Spano, president of the European Court of Human Rights: Robert.Spano@echr.coe.int

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on what is going on this Halloween:

This Halloween there will be Drag Queen events for children in many parts of the country. We’ve seen advertisements for Colorado Springs, Ithaca (ages 3 and up), Minneapolis, San Diego, Dorset (VT) and Wenatchee (WA).

These forays are based on Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH).

There are some parents and grandparents who think that DQSH is a fun-loving way for kids to appreciate diversity. What’s wrong with men dressed as women reading to kids in the local library?

Upon closer inspection, it becomes quite clear that these events were founded to promote an agenda, the goal of which is to normalize aberrant sexual behavior.

No place in the U.S. celebrates DQSH more than San Francisco. Here is what a writer for The Federalist had to say about this last year. “DQSH has brought not just one, not two, but at least three convicted sex criminals, two of whom are convicted pedophiles, into confined spaces with large numbers of young children on multiple occasions. Its event also have been sponsored by a man who’s been charged with seven counts of child pornography possession.”

DQSH was founded in San Francisco in 2015 by Michelle Tomasik, who goes by Michelle Tea. Though she has no academic credentials—she never even went to college—her standing in the lesbian community led to a post at Tulane University as a Writer-in-Residence.

Growing up in Chelsea, Massachusetts she recalled how her stepfather spied on her through a hole that he drilled in the wall; he never disputed  the abuse. When her mother decided to stay with him nonetheless, she bolted and left for Boston with her female lover. After her girlfriend became a prostitute, she followed suit. She Tea “married” Dashiell Lippmann in 2013.

Why did Tea found DQSH? Gaytimes said it was to introduce kids to the “LGBTQ+ culture.” She could not do so without the backing of the American Library Association (ALA). Those who run it are 87% white and 81% female, and virtually all of them are on the left.

Why have these librarians and teachers become activists for the LGBT cause? Lil Miss Hot Mess is one of the nation’s leading drag queen authors and activists promoting DQSH. She says she loves it when kids realize “that things aren’t necessarily the way they’ve always been told they have to be.” Again, a clear shot at parents. Who are they to tell their children what’s right and wrong?

Kevin Roberts is president of The Heritage Foundation. He is concerned about our culture creating a “new generation of drag kids.” He’s right. This past summer a video emerged of a young girl gyrating to music at a drag show as adults tossed dollar bills at her. It got so bad at a Brooklyn gay bar a few years ago that a reporter who covered a drag event said, “I left after seeing a child dance on stage for money at nighttime.”

When a six-year-old boy saw a tall man dressed as a woman at a library drag event, he asked, “Are you a boy or a girl?” “Well,” he said, “I guess I was born a boy. But I like to dress like a girl.” The message sent was not hard to understand.

In July, after a topless drag queen at a Miami bar sought to entertain a girl—she was “between three and five years old”—the performer boasted, “Children belong at drag shows!!!! Children deserve to see fun & expression $ freedom.” This is why another drag queen in Pennsylvania showed up shirtless teaching children how to spin on a stripper’s pole at a Pride Festival.

This is the face of freedom for drag queens—watching little kids be sexualized by perverts.

Don’t take my word for it. Listen to what honest persons involved in DQSH have to say.

Drag queen Kitty Demure warned parents last year about taking their kids to such events.

“I have no idea why you want drag queens to read books to your children… What in the hell has a drag queen even done to make you have so much respect for them and admire them so much? Other than put on makeup and jump on the floor and writhe around and do sexual things on stage? I have absolutely no idea why you would want that to influence your child. Would you want a stripper or a porn star to influence your child?”

Demure wasn’t finished with his reality check. “A drag queen performs in a nightclub for adults. There is a lot of filth that goes on, a lot of sexual stuff that goes on. And backstage there’s a lot of nudity, sex, and drugs… So I don’t think this is an avenue you would want your child to explore… But to actually get [your children] involved in drag is extremely, extremely irresponsible on your part.”

These perverts want to indoctrinate kids. Any adult who cooperates is sponsoring child abuse.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on President Biden’s interview with Dylan Mulvaney:

Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender TikTok star, is a disturbed young man who thinks he is a woman. It is said that he “first came out as gay, then queer, then non-binary.” Now he thinks he is a woman. What he thinks he will be next week no one knows.

No matter, for now he says he “wants to be a mom one day and I absolutely can.” But he can’t. He’s been denied by nature and nature’s God from ever bearing a child. By the way, he wants people to call him “she” and “they.” We vote for “they.”

With the mid-term elections a few weeks away, President Biden took the time to sit down with Dylan for a lengthy interview. What he said should alarm every parent in the nation.

“This is my 221st day of publicly transitioning,” Dylan told Biden. The president replied, “God love you.” If Dylan had said that he had transitioned from a white person to a black person—skin color can be changed through a series of melatonin injections—would he have offered his congratulations? If not, why not?

Dylan asked Biden, “Do you think states should have a right to ban gender-affirming healthcare?” To which the president said, “I don’t think any state or anybody should have the right to do that. As a moral question and as a legal question. I just think it’s wrong.”

The “devout Catholic” president places no limits on sex-transitioning operations. When he was running for president, he said that he was okay with an eight-year-old child taking puberty blockers and being subjected to other irreversible operations.

Biden told Dylan, “So I feel very, very strongly that you should have every single solitary right including, use of your gender-identity bathrooms in public.”

The idea that Biden endorses the right of boys, who think they are girls, to shower with girls is not hard to believe. After all, his own daughter, Ashley, alleges that “I remember having sex with Friends @ a young age; showers w/my dad (probably not appropriate).”

Any man who would shower with his daughter—when she is old enough to remember it—is a creep. When coupled with his support for little kids undergoing the knife in a vain attempt to change their sex, and his endorsement of boys showering with girls, it makes one wonder what in the world is going through Biden’s mind. This is beyond creepy.

Contact White House Press Secretary: Karine.Jean-Pierre@who.eop.gov

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on how young people are being exploited for money:

Two major attacks on young people are being launched by those whose only interest is making money off of them. To be specific, the push to legalize marijuana and the push to normalize transgenderism are the two biggest current threats to the health and well-being of young men and women in America.

It is worth noting that the social teachings of the Catholic Church clearly give preferential treatment to a market-based economy over a state-run economy, but there is nothing in those teachings that endorses a laissez-faire position. The Church understands the necessity of balancing economic interests with social interests, holding those in the business community to high moral standards. That voice desperately needs to be respected today.

Those making big money off of marijuana don’t care what happens to young people. There is a wealth of information on how much more potent today’s brand of this drug is compared to decades ago, leading to serious cases of psychosis. The degree of brain damage varies by the user, but no one doubts that it impairs mental acuity and is downright dangerous when users get behind the wheel.

According to Dr. Ken Finn, one of the nation’s leading experts on drug use, “Poison control calls are skyrocketing across the country in states that have both medical and recreational [marijuana] programs, particularly in the zero to five age group (my italics).” Worse, five states have marijuana legalization on the ballot in November.

Marijuana advocates argue that legalization is necessary because too many African Americans and Hispanics were selectively punished in the past for using the drug. But that is not what is driving the push to legalize the drug.

Ben Cort is the author of a book on this subject. He knows what’s really going on. “Multinational corporate interests” are leading the way. “The idea here is absolutely not social justice, nor any sort of reform in a meaningful way. The intent here is to get richer.”

Former House Speaker John Boehner, who in 2015 said he was “unalterably opposed to the legalization of marijuana,” did a 180 three years later when he left the Congress and became the poster boy for legalization.

To show how low he could go, he even partnered with Kathleen Sebelius, the former Health and Human Services czar under Obama. She was the one who declared war on Catholic non-profits, seeking to force them to purchase abortion-inducing drugs in their healthcare plans. But that didn’t make any difference to Boehner, who likes to tout his Catholic credentials. In fact, he got so caught up in making big bucks off of legalizing marijuana that he got into a legal dispute over his alleged failure to share profits with the man who hired him to lead the company.

Like the marijuana industry, the transgender industry is booming. Last year it posted sales of nearly $2 billion and is expected to reach $5 billion by the end of the decade. Planned Parenthood is making a fortune by ripping off sexually confused young people; it is the second-largest provider of hormonal injections in America.

To understand what sex-reassignment surgery does, consider what one of the most prominent defenders of this surgery has to say about it.

The Cleveland Clinic performs metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, scrotoplasty and chest surgery for troubled girls seeking to transition to the opposite sex. Metoidoplasty uses tissue from an enlarged clitoris so it can form a small penis. Phalloplasty uses a large section of skin and tissue from  female body parts (e.g., her arm), and then it is rolled to form a shaft so it can be attached to her groin. Scrotoplasty involves the creation of a new scrotum—parts are taken from the female’s labia majora—and are then used to make a scrotum-like sac.

Unfortunately, the Cleveland Clinic gives false information to these disturbed young girls. For example, it says that metoidioplastly “is a surgery sometimes requested by people assigned female at birth.” This is factually incorrect: no one is ever “assigned” one’s sex—it is determined by the father, the outcome of which is typically recorded by a healthcare professional.

It is also wrong to say, “This surgery helps to align their physical bodies with who they really are.” In fact, everyone knows who they really are when they are born. What the cutting and splicing does is to artificially create body parts. All the surgery in the world can never alter one’s chromosomal makeup, and the Cleveland Clinic knows this is true. But there is a lot of cash on the table, and that is dispositive.

Preying on young men and women, whether it be by poisoning their minds with drugs or deforming their bodies with surgery, is morally offensive. Indeed, it is child abuse. That the prime motivating force is to get rich makes those who are benefiting from such exploitation even more contemptible.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a New York Times obituary on Bernie McGuirk:

WABC legend Bernie McGuirk, who, along with Sid Rosenberg, commanded the number-one rated morning radio talk show in the New York area, “Bernie and Sid in the Morning,” died on October 5. On October 19, the New York Times ran an obituary on him by Ed Shanahan that read more like a tract than an honest summary of his professional life. [Full disclosure: I knew and liked Bernie for many years.]

McGuirk made a name for himself by working with Imus, the iconic radio talk-show host, for two decades; he was one of his sidekicks. Here is how the Times began its obit on him.

“The two men were fired because of a racist exchange about the Rutgers women’s basketball team, marring, but not ending, their shared radio success. Bernard McGuirk, a New York radio fixture who, as Don Imus’s on-air foil, helped incite a furor when the two men demeaned the Rutgers women’s basketball team in a racist, misogynistic exchange that marred—but only briefly disrupted—both of their careers, died on Oct. 5. He was 64.”

Never mind the incident took place 15 years ago—for the New York Times it was his defining moment.

What is really disturbing about the Times obit is that it reeks of politics. The newspaper doesn’t give a hoot about those who ham it up and say things that are offensive to their audience. In fact, they love it, providing what is said makes them laugh.

George Carlin was one of the most foul-mouthed and notoriously bigoted comedians in American history. When he died in 2008, the year after the Imus-McGuirk incident, the Times obit on him never mentioned his offensive language, or his bigoted commentary.

The first sentence of Carlin’s obit noted that he “gave voice to an indignant counterculture and assaulted the barricades of censorship on behalf of a generation of comics that followed him.” Indeed, this “scathing social critic” was congratulated for using obscenities on TV. Liberals loved his four-letter schtick so much that they awarded him four Grammy Awards.

Carlin had a particular hatred for Catholicism. “I would never want to be a member of a group whose symbol was a guy nailed to two pieces of wood.” He once envisioned one religious person talking to another, saying, “My god has a bigger d*** than your god.” This is the kind of brilliance that the left loved about him.

More recently, there is no shortage of Catholic-bashing comedians who never get criticized by the Times or those on the left. The following is a small selection of what these people have said.

In 2012, Jon Stewart’s Comedy Central show featured a picture of a naked women with her legs spread apart with a nativity scene ornament in between. “Maybe women could protect their reproductive organs from unwanted medical intrusion with vagina mangers,” he said.

His successor, Trevor Noah, commented in 2020 how Covid was changing our lifestyle. He said that “it’s going to be hard to take Communion seriously when the priest has to throw wafers into people’s mouth from across the room, the body of Christ—from downtown.”

In 2013, when Catholic cardinals assembled to elect a new pope, Samantha Bee called the gathering a “grope,” likening it to a “molestation,” saying that the process was not complete until the cardinals reached a “fellatio,” or an “oral consensus,” culminating in “white smoke rising from the chimney.”

In 2014, Sarah Silverman hijacked Jesus to support abortion. He was depicted making fun of unborn babies, saying “fertilized eggs aren’t people. People are people.” He also announced that he is “Jesus F***ing Christ.”

In 2010, Jay Leno said, “I actually saw a Catholic priest today call for a boycott.” To which Kevin Eubanks replied, “Really?” Leno explained, “Well, maybe he was just calling for a boy on a cot.”

In 2015, David Letterman commented on Pope Francis attending World Youth Day, saying, “if there’s anything the kids can’t get enough of, it’s a 76-year-old virgin. Come on! World Youth Day. Or as the Vatican calls it, salute to altar boys.”

We have done lengthy reports on Bill Maher, the biggest anti-Catholic bigot in TV history. Here’s one example. In 2017, he noted at the start of the holiday season what Christmas is all about. “Jesus and Mary didn’t f***. Isn’t that the whole point of that story.”

In 1993, the Times ran a glowing piece on Howard Stern, the most filthy-mouthed radio talk-show host in history. It said he “built his reputation on the use of language and subject matter that offends many and amuses many others.”

George Carlin and Howard Stern picked up where Lenny Bruce left off, coarsening the air waves with their obscene skits and anti-Catholic rants. Yet they are considered geniuses by the Times. But not Bernie McGuirk. He has to be held to a different standard. He didn’t make liberals laugh.

Contact the Times’ obit editor, William McDonald: wmcdon@nytimes.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the way Democrats are talking about abortion:

Most Americans are worried about inflation, their life savings, crime, open borders and education. Way down the list of concerns is abortion. But for Democrat leaders, nothing is more important.

“Hysteria” is the only word that accurately describes what leading Democrats are saying. Why the sky hasn’t fallen is a mystery. Here are some examples.

On October 17, Vice President Kamala Harris opened her remarks at the Nate Holden Performing Arts Center in Los Angeles by noting “when I’m traveling around the country, one of the feelings that I hear most is fear. It’s fear.” She later said, “there’s a lot of fear.”

The fear she was talking about was not the fear of being killed, raped or mugged. Nor was it the fear of families not being able to pay their bills. It was the fear that in some places elected officials have placed restrictions on abortion.

On October 18, President Biden held a political rally on abortion saying, “Patients are being denied prescriptions that they’ve been taking for years for conditions like rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis, you know, because pharmacies are concerned that those drugs could also be used to terminate a pregnancy so they’re not giving them their prescriptions.”

No evidence was given.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said after the overturning of Roe v. Wade that “People will die because of this decision.”

She was not referring to children being killed by abortion but to some hypothetical case involving what she calls pregnant “menstruating people.”

A new TV ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee quotes a doctor saying he thought the days of “back-alley abortions” were over. “Too often, women died. I thought those days were long behind us. But not for Mehmet Oz [the Pennsylvania Republican senatorial candidate].”

Fact Check: According to the CDC, the number of women who died of an illegal abortion in 1972 (the year before Roe) was not some astronomical figure, as pro-abortion activists have alleged. The number was 39.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said that “MAGA” Republicans have “pledged to ban abortion in all 50 states and sentence doctors for 5 years in prison.” Similarly, Kamala Harris has said their goal is to criminalize doctors and nurses “with up to five years in prison.”

This is patently untrue. What some Republicans have said is that healthcare providers who intentionally allow a baby born alive as a result of a botched abortion could serve up to 5 years in prison if they failed to attend to the child. The issue is infanticide, not abortion, which apparently makes no difference to these women.

Rep. Eric Swalwell is running a TV ad showing cops with guns drawn showing up at a house handcuffing a woman in front of her screaming husband and children because she had an unlawful abortion.

In fact, the only people who are being subjected to SWAT Teams showing up at their homes with guns drawn are pro-life activists.

Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams charged in August that her opponent, Gov. Brian Kemp, wants to “investigate and punish women for having miscarriages.”

PolitiFact, hardly a right-wing source, said her accusation was completely false.

To demagogue any issue is despicable, and it is doubly so when the issue is sensitive and divisive. It is a sign of desperation that so many prominent Democrats are distorting, and indeed lying, about abortion, just to get votes.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on a survey that shows major differences between liberals and conservatives:

Deseret News and the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University have released its latest annual American Family Survey; 3000 Americans were surveyed. It is a professional undertaking, employing noted social scientists. What it had to say about sex education is fascinating.

Let me get right to the conclusion: when it comes to sex education in the schools, and related issues, liberal Democrats are the outliers—they are so far removed from the thinking of the average American that it is startling.

When asked if the schools are spending too little time discussing sexual orientation and gender identity, only liberal Democrats agree. That view is in the minority: most moderate Democrats, moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans do not believe the schools are spending too little time on these subjects.

In fact, two-out-of-three Americans believe that the best place for children to learn about gender identity is in the home. Liberal Democrats, and those who are not parents, are the most likely to disagree with this position.

Should transgender athletes (typically biological men who have “transitioned” to a woman) be allowed to compete against female athletes? Most Republican conservatives (90 percent) disagree. Among most moderate Republicans, 71 percent disagreed while moderate Democrats and Independents are both split 50-50 on this issue. The figure jumps to 77 percent for liberal Democrats who are okay with males competing with females.

What about public school teachers using the students’ preferred pronouns, as opposed to using the pronoun that corresponds to the sex of the student? Liberal Democrats stand alone in the majority, with 78 percent saying teachers should use the students’ preferred pronouns; a majority of moderate Democrats, Independents, moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans disagree with them.

Should biological boys be allowed to use the girls’ bathroom? A majority (59 percent) of liberal Democrats are in agreement, saying bathroom choice should be up to the student; most moderate Democrats, Independents, moderate Republicans and conservative Republicans disagree.

It is interesting to note that liberal Democrats are the self-styled champions of women’s rights, yet they are alone in allowing boys to play girls’ sports, thus eviscerating the rights of females.

Here’s another interesting observation. While 77 percent of liberal Democrats are okay with boys competing with girls in sports, only 59 percent are okay with them sharing a bathroom with girls. So what are they afraid of? And where do they expect these boys/girls to shower?

The moral compass used by liberal Democrats is foreign to that of most Americans. They are the true outliers.

Regrettably, they have outsized influence—they are the most likely to occupy the cultural command centers of our society. This is perverse: their vision of sexuality is not shared by most Americans, yet they are in a position to foist it upon us, which is exactly what they do.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue explains why he is doubling down on his request for a probe or hearing of the FBI:

I wrote today to Sen. Charles Grassley, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asking him to convene a probe or hearing into the FBI’s duplicitous application of the FACE Act: Non-violent pro-life activists are treated as if they were domestic terrorists while violent abortion-rights activists are not being pursued at all.

This is my second request. My initial letter was sent September 26.

I am doubling down on my request because of a letter sent on October 12 by 40 Republican lawmakers to FBI Director Christopher Wray asking him to grant them a hearing on the FBI’s conduct regarding this issue. This effort is being led by Rep. Chip Roy and Sen. Mike Lee.

I wrote to these lawmakers today urging them to pursue this matter.

The average FBI agent is not the problem. But there is something sinister going on with the top brass. This injustice needs to stop before our civil liberties are further eroded.

Contact the FBI’s Office of Public Affairs: public.affairs@fbi.gov