This cartoon appeared in The Michigan Daily, campus newspaper at the University of Michigan. Catholic League president William A. Donohue’s letter to University of Michigan president Dr. James Duderstadt appears below.

Dr. James Duderstadt
President,
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, MI 48104

Dear Dr. Duderstadt:

Enclosed is a copy of a cartoon that was nm in The Michigan Daily. The point of the cartoon, as any honest observer would agree, is to insult Catholics.

Furthermore, it is ironic to read the “Notable Quotable” statement that appears above the bigoted cartoon. It counsels against stereotypes but, of course, it counsels against stereotyping black men, not Catholic priests.

I am familiar with the commitment that the University of Michigan has made to multiculturalism and respect for diversity. Since it is apparent that there is a problem with Catholic-bashing on your campus (I have evidence of other such incidents), I would be most interested in knowing whether anti-Catholicism receives due recognition in your multicultural curricula. I would also like to know whether sensitivity training seminars are available for those who offend the sensibilities of persons on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation.

Please be advised that as president o f the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, I am prepared to do what is necessary to rid your campus of the bigotry it presently entertains.

Sincerely,
William A. Donohue, Ph.D.
President

Though there was no St. Patrick’s Day Parade in Boston in 1994, there will be one in 1995, but it is uncertain whether there will be one in 1996. The Catholic League has been involved in this affair from the beginning, and will see it through to the end, whatever the outcome. The controversy pits Boston’s gay community against local Irish Catholics. However, the legal implications are national in scope because the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately decide the issue.

For over 40 years, the St. Patrick’s Day Parade in Boston was sponsored by the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council. The parade celebrated not only St. Patrick’s Day but Evacuation Day, a day commemorating the withdrawal of British troops from Boston during the Revolution. In 1992, the Irish American Gay Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston (GLIB) applied for permission to march, but their bid was rejected.

After GLIB lost, it instituted a suit in the Superior Court of Massachusetts. The Catholic League filed an amicus brief siding with the parade’s sponsors, but it did not prevail in court: an injunction was issued mandating that GLIB be admitted to the parade. The Veterans Council appealed the case to the Massachusetts Court of Appeals and ultimately to the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth. Defeated in all three state courts, they followed the League’s advice and cancelled the parade in 1994.

The case has now been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which will review the findings of the Massachusetts Court. The high court recently accepted the case and is scheduled to hear oral arguments in April; a decision is expected by late June. Once again, the Catholic League filed an amicus brief supporting the right of the parade’s sponsors to determine which groups it wants to admit.

In a related matter, in July 1994 the sponsors of the Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade applied for a permit to conduct the 1995 parade as a protest against the issuance of the injunction. They filed suit in the United States District Court in Boston seeking a declaratory judgment and injunction to compel the City to issue the permit for the parade to be held on March 19, 1995 without the participation of GLIB. On January 17, 1995, the parade’s sponsors won: the court admitted that it could not deny them the right to exclude GLIB as the purpose of this march was to protest the forced inclusion of gays in the annual parade. The result was a victory for freedom of association.

The reason why the initial court decision went against the parade’s sponsors was due to the fact that that march was not billed as a protest. As such, it was the judgment of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that GLIB had a legal right to participate in the parade under the state’s public accommodations law. It is this decision that will be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many have wondered why the St. Patrick’s Day Parade in New York City can exclude gays but the Boston march cannot. The situation in the two cities, however, is quite different.

In New York, the sponsors are an Irish Catholic group, namely the Ancient Order of Hibernians (AOH), whereas in Boston the sponsors are unrelated to any religion.

In New York, the purpose of the parade is to honor St. Patrick, whereas in Boston the purpose is only partially a recognition of St. Patrick. Given these differences, it was easier for a federal judge in New York to uphold the right of the AOH to bar anyone they wanted. Thus, comparisons between the two parades are inexact. These differences mean that even if the Boston gay group were to win in the Supreme Court, it would not necessarily mean that the AOH would have to accept the Irish Lesbian and Gay Organization (ILGO).

Despite ILGO’s failure to win in New York, it has not prevented the gay group from playing a disruptful role in the annual Irish Catholic parade. Last year 90 members of ILGO were arrested for trying to stop the parade, only to have Judge Robert Sackett of the Manhattan Criminal Court throw out the charges. Judge Sackett stunned New York when he said that the arrests violated the First Amendment rights of the protesters (the League called for his resignation from the bench, and so did the New York Daily News). This year Cardinal O’Connor will be the Grand Marshal and ILGO is planning to make “a strong reaction.” The Catholic League, which will march in the parade, will make sure that ILGO’s “reaction” will not go unanswered.

Notwithstanding the differences between the New York and the Boston parades, the decision by the Supreme Court on the Boston St. Patrick’s Day Parade will have widespread ramifications, and that is why the Catholic League has remained active in the case from the very beginning.

For the first time, the Catholic League will be marching in the New York St. Patrick’s Day Parade. All members in the New York area are invited to join us. Call the New York national headquarters office at (212) 371-3191 for details.

The Catholic League is proud to announce the names of its new board of advisors. Unlike the board of directors, the board of advisors does not oversee the operations of the League, rather it acts as a sounding board for the League’s president. All of the members are prominent lay Catholics associated with reputable institutions. In the interest of brevity, we only comment on their status, not on their many achievements.

BOARD OF ADVISORS

Helen Alvare, Pro-Life Director, National Catholic Conference of Bishops
William Bentley Ball, Distinguished Catholic Attorney
Linda Chavez, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Robert Destro, Distinguished Catholic University Law Professor
Dinesh D’Souza, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Robert George, Distinguished Princeton University
Professor Mary Ann Glendon, Distinguished Harvard Law
Professor Dolores Bernadette Grier, Vice-Chancellor, Archdiocese of New York
John P. Hale, Distinguished Catholic Attorney
Alan Keyes, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Stephen Krason, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Michael Novak, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Patrick Riley, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
Robert Royal, Distinguished Catholic Scholar
William Simon, President, J.M. Ohlin Foundation
Paul Vitz, Distinguished New York University Professor
Walter Weber, Distinguished Attorney, American Center for Law and Justice
George Weigel, Distinguished Catholic Scholar

The following letter appeared in The Catholic Standard and Times, weekly of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Mr. Delaney is president of the League’s newly reorganized Greater Philadelphia-South Jersey Chapter.

During the entire solemn season of Advent right through the sacred feast of Christmas, Christians were able to view the works ofAndres Serrano at the University of Pennsylvania, particularly his “reverential” (their word, not mine) offering of a photograph of a crucifix immersed in a vial of urine.

Patrick Murphy, executive director of the Institute of Contemporary Art at the university, said the work was “only one of 52 works in the exhibition. ”

If there were so many other fine works, then the removal of a single sacrilegious and grossly offensive work could not have done much harm to the exhibition. But then we would be faced with (charges of) free artistic expression and all that!

I wonder if the administration at Penn would have been as concerned about free artistic expression and would have sanctioned this exhibit if the crucifix in this vial o f urine were replaced by the Islamic Crescent Moon or the Star of David or a replica of Buddha?

That the University of Pennsylvania, priding itself on its tolerance and inclusiveness, would in callous disregard for millions allow such a display is atrocious.

I fully expect that Penn would at least have the grace to apologize to the Catholic and the larger Christian community for such an egregious insult.

Arthur J Delaney, Jr.
President
Greater Philadelphia – South Jersey Chapter

On January 20, 1995, the Catholic League sent the following letter to Congressman Bob Livingston of Louisiana, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, opposing public funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.

Dear Congressman Livingston:

As president of the nation’s largest Catholic civil rights organization, I must register the concerns that the Catholic League has regarding public funding for the National Endowment for the Arts. I know that much of the work that the NEA does is quality but I am also aware that some ofit is stridently anti-Catholic. This might suggest that we should support public funding of the NEA since most of what is funded is unobjectionable. But that is not the way I see it.

The NEA has had plenty of time to reform itself. Yet the record shows that the organization is just as defiant about its “rights” now as it was before the criticisms were made. We, as Catholics, have rights too, and among them is the right not to be defamed, and this is especially true when defamation is funded with government money. We lived through the Serrano insults and, more recently, we endured the insults o fRon Athey. The time has come to put an end to this outrage and stop asking Catholics to fund defamation against their religion.

Sincerely,
William A. Donohue, Ph.D.
President

Did you know that this past Christmas a high school principal in Rhode Island banned students from using the word “Christ” in a concert?

And did you know that in Scarsdale, N.Y., teachers were forbidden to distribute candy canes because they were classified as religious symbols?