Bill Donohue comments on Friday’s decision by a federal judge who issued an injunction that allows the owners of a private company not to provide abortifacients, contraceptives, and sterilization services to their employees as mandated by ObamaCare:

The ruling in Newland v. Sebelius is significant: it means that the Obama administration not only has to contend with Catholic non-profits who object to providing immoral services in their healthcare plans, they must deal with Catholics in the private sector who similarly object. By invoking the Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment religious liberty guarantees, the plaintiffs broke new ground for private employers.

Lawyers for the Obama administration were taken aback when U.S. District Judge John Kane sided with the Catholic owners of Hercules Industries. The attorneys for the government were correct when they maintained that if the injunction were granted, it would mean that they would be faced with a flood of requests seeking an exemption. “These interests are countered,” Judge Kane said, “and indeed outweighed, by the public interest in the free exercise of religion.”

The Catholic League will do what it can to get the word out to all Catholic business owners: the time to revolt is now. There is no virtue in complying with a government edict that violates the conscience rights of Catholics, independent of whether they work in the public or private sector. But there is great virtue in suing the administration by invoking the religious liberty principles as articulated in this case.

Bill Donohue addresses an editorial in the New York Times, and a column by Lisa Miller in the Washington Post, that appeared on Sunday:

The central issue in the fight between the Obama administration and the Catholic Church is the right of the federal government to redefine religious institutions as entities that hire and serve mostly people of their own faith. Secondarily, the fight is over forcing Catholics to pay for abortion-inducing drugs. But one looks in vain for the Church’s critics to even acknowledge this reality. It’s not contraception that is in play—“It’s the First Amendment, Stupid.”

The Times says the Obama mandate “specifically exempts houses of worship.” Try telling that to Donald Cardinal Wuerl who runs the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.; it is a self-insured entity and thus must be forced to pay for morally objectionable services. The Times says most American Catholic women do not agree with the Church’s contraception stand, but fails to mention that because of the Obama administration’s disrespect for religious liberty, support for Obama has dropped precipitously among Catholic women.

Lisa Miller argues that a “small group of very conservative bishops have hijacked the church,” and cites Stockton Bishop Stephen Blaire as taking the other side. She is wrong. Three days before Miller’s piece ran, Blaire issued a statement saying, “I stand solidly with my brother bishops in our common resolve to overturn the unacceptable intrusion of government into the life of the Church by the HHS Mandate.”

Here’s what is really driving this story. The secular critics of the Catholic Church, beginning with HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, are so out of touch with Catholic sentiment today that they seriously misread the reaction to this issue. Moreover, they thoroughly underestimated the resolve of today’s crop of Catholic bishops. Now they are trying to deflect what is really happening, but it’s too late.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on lawsuits filed today against the Obama administration. At issue is the constitutionality of the Health and Human Services edict seeking to force Catholic non-profits to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptive services and sterilization in their insurance plans:

This is a great day for those who believe in religious liberty. Suing the Obama administration for seeking to trash the First Amendment rights of Catholics are 43 Catholic dioceses and institutions from all over the nation.

Among those filing suit are: the Archdiocese of New York; the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.; the Archdiocese of St. Louis; the Diocese of Rockville Centre; the Diocese of Dallas; the Diocese of Fort Worth; the Diocese of Pittsburgh; the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend; the Michigan Catholic Conference (which represents all seven dioceses in the state); Catholic University of America; Franciscan University of Steubenville; and the University of Notre Dame. Entities ranging from retirement homes to publishing houses joined the lawsuits.

There will be more. And depending on how the U.S. Supreme Court rules next month on the constitutionality of ObamaCare, this may just be the beginning.

Catholics are sending an unmistakable sign to President Obama, Kathleen Sebelius, et al. that we will not be obedient. We will not do as we are told. Instead, we will do what is just. The Catholic rebellion has begun.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ address at Georgetown University today:

Kathleen Sebelius quoted selectively from John F. Kennedy’s 1960 address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. She said she shares Kennedy’s vision of America “where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against us all.”

This was obviously meant as a shot at those bad bishops who allegedly want to impose their will on the public.

In that same speech, however, Kennedy said, “I would not look with favor upon a President working to subvert the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.”

Perhaps someone can gently explain to Sebelius why this shows JFK’s astonishing prescience.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial in today’s Los Angeles Times:

The latest liberal voice worried stiff over the Catholic Church’s resistance to the Obama administration’s war on Catholicism is the Los Angeles Times. Today they accuse Donald Cardinal Wuerl of the Washington Archdiocese of “censorship” for speaking out against Georgetown’s embrace of abortion champion Kathleen Sebelius; the paper says the students should be exposed to “a variety of viewpoints.”

Ironically, the last thing the Los Angeles Times is known for is exposing its readers to “a variety of viewpoints.” In 2003, its editor, John Carroll, sent a memo to his editors complaining about the one-sided liberal stories the paper runs. In 2005, a UCLA study of media bias listed the paper as one of the most biased in the nation. In 2009, veteran Washington Post reporter Tom Edsall said the paper was composed in large part of the “liberal elite.”

Nor does the paper have any moral standing to lecture anyone about “censorship.” Two years ago, it pulled a patently inoffensive cartoon, “Where’s Muhammad?” Were they being respectful of Muslims? Or were they fearful? Either way, they engaged in censorship (as they define it). Ten years earlier they showed their respect—or was it fear?—of Muslims when they dropped a promotional ad that featured images of Muslim women in chadors mixed in with bikini-clad women. To show how deeply respectful—or fearful—the boys and girls at the paper were, over 200 editors and reporters signed a petition calling for the ad to be censored.

In other words, the Los Angeles Times shuns diversity of opinion, loathes equal treatment of religion, and likes censorship. Which is why it is such a beacon of liberal thought.

Contact editorial board chief Nicholas Goldberg: nicholas.goldberg@latimes.com

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an editorial in today’s Washington Post:

The Washington Post says it is “shocking” that Donald Cardinal Wuerl would criticize Georgetown University for inviting Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to speak at one of the commencement exercises tomorrow. We find it shocking that the Washington Post would involve itself in the internal affairs of the Catholic Church. If Cardinal Wuerl were to criticize the Washington Post for disciplining one of its miscreant reporters, we would never hear the end of it.

The editorial board looks positively foolish when it speaks about the importance of “the free exchange of ideas.” So are we to conclude that all ideas should freely be exchanged on campus, and that its proponents should be welcomed at a Catholic university? If so, this would include spokesmen ranging from the Flat Earth Society to the Ku Klux Klan.

The fact is that the editorial board of the Washington Post loves abortion rights, loves President Obama, and loves self-identified Catholics who love abortion rights, love Obama, and publicly reject the teachings of the Catholic Church on abortion. Which is why they love Kathleen Sebelius.

Georgetown is home to two pro-abortion groups, so it is hardly surprising to learn that it would seek a confrontation by inviting Sebelius—next to Obama, she is the most pro-abortion person in public life today.

We are proud of Cardinal Wuerl for standing on principle: he stands in stark relief to the journalistic arrogance of the Washington Post.

Contact Fred Hiatt at the Post: fredhiatt@washpost.com

Rep. Rosa DeLauro has written to Timothy Cardinal Dolan asking him to mobilize the bishops in a campaign to combat poverty. Catholic League president Bill Donohue responds as follows:

Rep. DeLauro is the enemy of the poor, thus she has no moral leg to stand on. She has worked to kill school vouchers for children with disabilities and has voted against scholarship grants for African American students in D.C. But she is a big champion of abortion, including abortions where the baby is 80 percent born; she has even voted to fund abortion with federal dollars.

DeLauro’s Catholic credentials include authoring a “Statement of Principles” in 2006, signed by 55 Catholic Democrats. The document made the argument that it is entirely legitimate to be a Catholic in good standing and promote abortion rights. In 2007, DeLauro was one of 18 Catholic Democrats to criticize the pope for his remarks on this subject.

Not signing DeLauro’s letter, but signing a recent one in which they accused Rep. Paul Ryan of “distorting church teaching to give moral cover” to his proposed budget were Nicholas Cafardi, Daniel Maguire, Marie Dennis and Stephen Schneck. No sooner had Archbishop Charles Chaput moved from Denver to Philadelphia when Cafardi surfaced saying “Chaput would be well-advised to leave politics aside.” But now Cafardi wants the pro-life archbishop to get involved in politics by lobbying for welfare. Maguire is so in love with abortion rights that he has condemned Mother Teresa for her yeoman work, branding her “a firm defender of male dominance.” Dennis is co-president of Pax Christi International, an organization that has blasted the pro-life work of the Susan B. Anthony List. And in 2009, Schneck signed a letter praising the nomination of Kathleen Sebelius (he has since called for her resignation).

We would be remiss if we didn’t notice the curious relationship between DeLauro and the Catholic News Service which arranged the interview.

Contact DeLauro’s chief of staff, Beverly Pheto: beverly.pheto@mail.house.gov

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the findings of a new survey published by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life:

Only 35 percent of the American people think the Democratic Party is “friendly to religion,” while 54 percent say the Republicans are. When asked specifically about the Obama administration, 39 percent see it as “friendly,” and 23 percent see it as “unfriendly.” But in 2009, only 17 percent said the administration was “unfriendly to religion.”

The big problem for Obama is with Catholics, especially white Catholics. The percent of Catholics who say the administration is “unfriendly to religion” has jumped in the past three years from 15 percent to 25 percent. Among white Catholics, the percent who say the administration is “unfriendly” has gone from 17 percent to 31 percent.

It is not hard to fathom why the Obama administration is having a hard time with Catholics. After all, it is trying to force its secular agenda down their throat by making those who work in Catholic non-profit groups pay for abortion-inducing drugs in their insurance premiums.

Moreover, the administration recently denied funding to a Catholic social service agency that helps women and children merely because it is pro-life. Obama has appointed people such as Kathleen Sebelius to his cabinet, even though she has been at war with the Catholic Church for decades. He tried to get a big post for a woman who once worked on an ACLU lawsuit trying to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status. He hosted a forum for some of the biggest Catholic bashers in the nation when he welcomed the Secular Coalition for America in 2010. He has opposed school choice—vouchers for indigent parents to send their children to a parochial school—while funding the “choice” of aborting their babies. The list is endless.

Everyone knows that Protestants vote Republican and Jews vote Democrat. It’s Catholics who are up for grabs.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on today’s Senate vote to table the “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act”:

The 51-48 vote to table an amendment by Sen. Roy Blunt that would guarantee rights of conscience for the employees of religious institutions does not end the debate.

There is a bill sponsored by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry that would also secure conscience rights for people of faith, and it has already garnered a near-majority of House members. Also available as a possible remedy are the rights encoded in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. And, of course, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the ObamaCare legislation later this month; a decision is expected in late spring.

The Obama administration has chosen to shut out the Catholic voice (save for the dissidents). Consider the following:

• Archbishop William Lori has said that there was no discussion between administration officials and the bishops prior to the decisions of January 20 and February 10 that effectively mandated Catholic institutions to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraception and sterilization.

• Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius has admitted under questioning that the Justice Department was never asked to consider the religious-rights implications of her draconian directive.

• Dr. Linda Rosenstock, who served on a committee of the Institute of Medicine that was empowered to study the HHS mandate, said on Tuesday that at no time did anyone on the committee ever weigh the issue of religious rights.

Obama does not want to dialogue—he wants to dictate. Game on.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:

On February 15, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius said Catholic insurance carriers will not be given an exemption from the mandate requiring insurance companies to provide for contraceptive, abortifacient and sterilization services. She explained, “Religious insurance companies don’t really design the plans they sell based on their own religious tenets.” This is an outrageous smear.

Last month, Our Sunday Visitor ran a splendid article on this subject titled, “Investing with a Clear Conscience.” It listed the following companies as following Catholic investment principles: Ave Maria Mutual Funds; Christian Brothers Investment Services; Epiphany Funds; First Affirmative Financial Network; Investing for Catholics; LKCM Aquinas Funds; Prosperitas Wealth Management; and Trinity Fiduciary Partners.

The article also listed the six investment principles as laid out in the bishops’ 1991 statement on socially responsible investing (it was revised in 2003): Protecting Human Life; Promoting Human Dignity; Reducing Arms Production; Pursuing Economic Justice; Protecting the Environment; and Encouraging Corporate Responsibility.

Sebelius, of course, is a champion of partial-birth abortion, so she obviously fails the bishops’ test. That is her business. But she has no business misinforming the public about the honorable role played by many Catholic insurance companies.

The Catholic League uses Christian Brothers as its insurance carrier, and we will fight attempts by the Obama administration to undermine its integrity.