Only 63% of Catholics approve contraception mandate

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments as follows:
Survey research was pioneered by Columbia University sociologists during World War II. By the time I was studying for my doctorate in sociology at New York University in the 1970s, the scientific nature of survey research had made great strides. But much depends on the methodology, as well as the questions asked.
The New York Times is reporting today that a majority of Catholics (it does not cite the percentage, either in the article or on the New York Times/CBS Poll website) “are at odds with the [Catholic] church’s official stance.”
A survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life reports that 55 percent of all Catholics, and 63 percent of those who attend church weekly, are opposed to the Obama mandate.
A Rasmussen survey found that 77 percent of Catholics oppose the Obama mandate.
What’s going on? The Times asked respondents, “Do you support or oppose a recent federal requirement that private health insurance plans cover the full cost of birth control for their female patients?” Notice there was no mention of the religious liberty implications, nor of the issue of exemptions. It’s just about free services for women.
Pew asked whether there should be an exemption for religiously affiliated institutions that object. Similarly, Rasmussen asked whether “individuals should have the right to choose between different types of health insurance plans.”
In short, how the question is framed affects the answer. I will leave it to the reader to decide whether the Times asked about the real issue.

Be careful whose statistics you believe  on this. There is dissent on the Church teaching on contraception, but I have seen numbers as high as 98% of Catholics approving of the Obama mandate. That is utter nonsense!

Birth control is NOT the issue in HHS mandate

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the way the media are casting the controversy over the Obama healthcare plan:

In a name association game, when most people hear the words “birth control,” they think of the pill. Most Americans, including Catholics, treat the pill as something altogether different from abortion. So when pollsters ask about the Obama healthcare plan, framing the issue as one about birth control, it is not going to set off the alarms: mention abortion and everything changes. Now consider the evidence.

In a Lexis-Nexis search today, I linked the words “Catholic” “Obama” and “birth control,” and found that in the last week, there were 345 stories (there is always some repetition, particularly with wire services). Within this same grouping, when the words “morning-after pill” were included, the number dropped to 62; when “abortifacients” was linked to the initial three terms, there were 31 stories; and when the term “abortion-inducing drugs” was included, the number dropped to 20.

In other words, the media are framing the issue in terms of the least offensive issue. Add to this the fact that so many Americans just take a glimpse at the headline, which uniformly cites birth control, and the result is a massive distortion.

Why does the Obama plan include abortion-inducing drugs? Because that’s where he wants to go—he would like nothing better than to force all religious institutions to provide abortion coverage—and this is his way of prying the door open.

This issue is, first and foremost, about the First Amendment right to religious liberty. Secondly, it is about abortion. The lust for abortion that this administration has is unparalleled, and its unrelenting drive to shove its radical secular agenda down the throats of the faithful is equally unprecedented.


Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone: 212-371-3191
E-mail: cl@catholicleague.org

Warren Buffett is an anti Catholic

WHY WARREN BUFFETT IS ANTI-CATHOLIC

January 25, 2012

 

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an aspect of Warren Buffett’s finances not ordinarily discussed:

Warren Buffett’s comment that the rich should pay higher taxes, now enshrined by President Barack Obama as the “Buffett Rule,” is drawing much applause. What is not being discussed is the billionaire’s support for anti-Catholicism. First some background information.

Over several decades, Buffett has spent a fortune funding radical abortion organizations like NARAL and Planned Parenthood; he has lavishly given money to train a new generation of abortion physicians; he has spent millions to help RU-486 (the abortion-inducing drug) to win FDA approval; and he gave his pro-abortion, population-control friends at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation nearly $31 billion in 2006 for more of the same. There’s nothing anti-Catholic about any of this, but when he intentionally seeks to subvert Catholicism by dishonestly funding pro-abortion organizations that have hijacked the Catholic name, that’s another story.

To be specific, Buffett has given hundreds of millions over the years to anti-Catholic front groups like Catholics for Choice (formerly Catholics for a Free Choice) and its sister organization in Latin America, Catholics for the Right to Decide. In 2010, the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation alone gave $759,822 to the former, and almost $1.7 million to the latter. These letter-head organizations wouldn’t exist if they depended on donations from members—they don’t have any—they exist because of the likes of Warren Buffett.

If Buffett, or someone like him, were to throw millions upon millions funding Jews for Jesus, what would the Jewish community call him? Now you know why Warren Buffett has earned the tag anti-Catholic. 


Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone:             212-371-3191      
E-mail: cl@catholicleague.org

The Good News about Catholics; they like orthodoxy

In fact. some leave the Church in search of it, according to this news release from the Catholic League. Its not that the Church isn't orthodox enough on matters of faith and morals, its probably that they don't see it in their local parish.

CATHOLIC CHURCH IS BOOMING

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on new survey data profiling Catholicism:

All we ever hear from the wild-eyed critics of the Catholic Church, including the dissidents within, is that the Church had better "get with it" and change its teachings on abortion, homosexuality and women's ordination. Yet it is precisely those religious institutions that are the most liberal on these issues—the mainline Protestant denominations—that are collapsing. Not so the Catholic Church. Indeed, its numbers are going north while the mainline denominations are going south.

The latest findings by the "Emerging Models of Pastoral Leadership" project, a collaborative effort with Georgetown University's Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, are illuminating. In the last 40 years, the Catholic population has increased by 75 percent; it has grown by 50 percent since 1990. More important, Catholic attendance at Mass is up 15 percent since 2000. And in the last five years, contributions have increased by 14 percent. It is also important to note that there has been a 40 percent increase in Latinos in the Church over the past five years.

Shedding more light on the statistics is a study released a few months ago by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion. Its "Landscape Survey" found that of those Catholics who have left the Church, roughly half became unaffiliated while the other half became Protestant. Regarding the latter half, only 23 percent did so because of the Church's teachings on abortion and homosexuality; only 16 percent left because of the way women are treated. Importantly, two-thirds of these Catholics elected to join a Protestant evangelical church.

In other words, disaffected Catholics who left for another religion opted to join a more conservative church. That they did not run down the block in search of a mainline denomination—one that entertains the liberal agenda on issues governing sexuality and women—is telling.

It's time some people took a hard look at the data and made some hard choices. This is great news for the Catholic Church.

Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone: 212-371-3191
E-mail: cl@catholicleague.org

Terrorists treated better than Irish priests

NO ONE not even murderous terrorists are treated with such disdain as dead  Irish priests who may have hurt children 50 years ago. So much for innocent until proven guilty. 

---

 IF ONLY PRIESTS WERE TERRORISTS

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on two editorials in today's New York Times:

 

In the New York Times editorial, "A Right Without a Remedy," a strong plea is made for the U.S. government to respect the constitutional rights of detainees at Guantánamo Bay. There is another editorial, "Acts of Contrition," that takes the Catholic Church in Ireland to task for cases of priestly sexual abuse. The former editorial says absolutely nothing about why suspected Muslim terrorists who want to blow up the U.S. are being held in custody, and the latter editorial says absolutely nothing about the rights of accused priests. If only priests were terrorists.

 

The Times says the Church in Ireland "has a long way to go to cleaning house," insisting that "reforms are lagging" and "some predator priests are still in ministry." It is thrice wrong.

 

In 2005, the Irish Bishops' Conference issued a comprehensive report on reforms underway, "Our Children, Our Church: Child Protection Policies and Procedures for the Catholic Church in Ireland." In 2008, another report was released, "Safeguarding Children: Standards and Guidance Document for the Catholic Church in Ireland." In 2010, the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church in Ireland published its 2009 Annual Report.

 

The latter document shows that 42 percent of the new allegations made in 2009 were about deceased priests. "None of the allegations reported to the National Office originated from children or young people. Some went back to events that took place in the 1950s and 1960s." Not a single priest who has had an accusation made against him is in full ministry, and those who are in limited ministry are there despite the fact that "the allegation that caused the removal from full ministry has not been confirmed through any civil or canonical court process." In other words, the Times got it wrong again. It should correct the record.

 

Contact the Public Editor, Arthur S. Brisbane: public@nytimes.com

Three Ex-Catholics on "The View" criticized Bishop Olmstead

DELIRIUM OVERCOMES "THE VIEW" GIRLS  

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on today's episode of "The View" which featured a discussion about the Catholic Church and abortion:

 

It is an ugly site: grown women sitting around bashing a religion that none belong to. Though at one time three did: Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg and Elisabeth Hasselbeck are all ex-Catholics. They went bonkers today—the crosstalk makes them look downright delirious—ripping away about the Catholic Church because a nun was excommunicated for allowing an abortion at St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix. What they didn't say was that the nun gave her formal consent to the killing of an innocent child. More important, since none of the panelists are Catholic, it is none of their business anyway.

 

The fact is (though one would never know it by watching this extended diatribe) the parent organization to this hospital, Catholic Healthcare West, has a long record of flagrantly violating the teachings of the Catholic Church. In other words, the San Francisco-based organization is a serial offender.

 

Had the non-Catholics focused only on this issue, that would be one thing. But, no, they trotted out miscreant priests, painted the Catholic Church as anti-women, etc. That's what happens when the bigotry is deeply embedded—one issue is enough to set off an explosion.

 

Behar is no stranger to Catholic bashing, so it was expected she would join in while the others piled on. Hasselbeck poses as a conservative, but her pathological hatred of Catholicism reveals who she really is. Sherri Shepherd, who usually keeps her mouth shut during these harangues, unwisely spoke up. As for Whoopi, who reportedly has had at least a half-dozen abortions—beginning at age 14 [click here]—it is no wonder she looked the most delirious.

 

Contact producer Bill Geddie: bill.geddie@abc.com

Bill Donohue on the Condom Controversy

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the pope's recent remarks on condoms:

Pope Benedict XVI acknowledges that condoms may make sense in preventing the transmission of disease, and he immediately sets off a firestorm. But he never said condoms are an acceptable means of birth control, nor did he say that they are the answer to HIV/AIDS. Indeed, he said he opposed the widespread use of condoms because that "implies the banalization of sexuality." He also criticized the "fixation" on condoms as a means of combating AIDS.

While what the Holy Father said is newsworthy, it was not revolutionary. Even with regards to the birth control pill, theCatholic Church has allowed for exceptions. In his 1968 encyclical, Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI said, "the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever." Moreover, the Church accepts the use of hormonal contraception to treat endometriosis.

We have been asked by the media what the Catholic League's position is on this issue. This misunderstands our role: we don't have a position on any Church teaching—we simply accept their wisdom and defend the right of the Church to have its voice heard with respect in the public square. We therefore stand proudly behind the pope's comments on condoms. (emphasis mine; I love the way he states this; its not his or any layman or clergy's role to have a 'position' on the pope's statements on morality. We are to obey and defend the wisdom of Peter). 

CATHOLICS DECIDE THE ELECTION

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on last night's election results:

For the past few decades, Catholics have decided who wins elections nationally. After the McGovernization of the Democratic Party in 1972, Catholics were left homeless: they felt betrayed by the Democrats and were leery of the Republicans; they have been up for grabs ever since. Last night they proved once again that of the three major religions in the U.S., they are the ones that count most: Protestants never abandon the Republicans, and Jews never abandon the Democrats.
Catholics voted 58-40 for the Republican candidates last night. This was a dramatic 20-point swing from two years ago. What caused Catholics to bolt is not clear, but there is one issue that surely played a major role: the out-of-control debt. Practicing Catholics (the others should not be counted as Catholics for polling purposes) understand the virtue of self-denial, and by extension, they value belt tightening at home. What they don't appreciate is promiscuity, be it sexual, fiscal or otherwise.

Michael Sean Winters, a liberal Catholic writer, bemoans what happened, saying that the Democratic loss means "Anti-poverty efforts are off the table." This is cause for celebration: the anti-poverty efforts of the Obama administration has resulted in a poverty rate of 14.3 percent, the highest national rate since 1994. If a jobs-centered economic plan is adopted, the poverty rate will likely decline.
Here's something to watch. The Department of Health and Human Services is now pondering whether to adopt the ACLU's initiative that would force Catholic hospitals to provide emergency abortions as a condition of receiving federal funds; this would effectively close most of them. If this were to happen, a whole lot more than six in ten Catholics would vote for the Republicans in 2012. The fact that the Obama administration is even giving this serious consideration is something that every Catholic in the nation should know about. Had last night's results gone the other way, it's a sure bet the anti-Catholic agenda would have benefited.

Jeff Field
Director of Communications
The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights

MOTHER TERESA TRIBUTE DENIED

Anthony Malkin, owner of the Empire State Building, released a statement today saying, "As a privately owned building, ESB has a specific policy against any other lighting for religious figures or requests by religions and religious organizations."

Commenting is Catholic League president Bill Donohue:

Malkin is either misinformed or he is lying. Here's the proof: When John Cardinal O'Connor died in 2000, the Empire State Building was lighted in red and white; in 2005, when Pope John Paul II died, the tower lights were extinguished in his honor; also in 2005, the tower was aglow in yellow, red and blue in tribute to the 125th anniversary of the Salvation Army; and every year the colors red, black and green are lit in memory of Rev. Martin Luther King. In other words, there is no policy barring religious figures or organizations from being honored.

When I applied to the Empire State Building on February 2, I received a phone call from Nicole Grzywacz, Public Relations and Events Coordinator, saying the application had been received. She never indicated there was any policy which would prohibit my request. Indeed, when I spoke to her assistant, Stacy Ann, she never implied that there was a problem.

Malkin has made his decision to stiff Catholics. I have made mine: We will call off our petition drive, but we will go forward with our demonstration outside the Empire State Building on August 26. His decision to double down at this juncture—in the face of massive support for our request—is something he will regret for the rest of his life.


Contact Daniel Hernandez: daniel.hernandez@edelman.com

Mother Teresa protest moves to next step

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Day 15 of the protest campaign on behalf of Mother Teresa:

Today I am writing to every Catholic elementary school in the Archdiocese of New York, the Diocese of Brooklyn and the Diocese of Rockville Centre informing them of our protest demonstration on August 26 outside the Empire State Building on 34th Street and 5th Avenue.
The rally is being held to protest the decision of Anthony Malkin, the owner of the storied building, not to overrule those who have chosen to deny a tribute to Mother Teresa: our request to have the towers shine blue and white, the colors of her congregation, on August 26th, the 100th anniversary of her birthday, was denied without explanation. Yet the same persons who chose to stiff Mother Teresa decided to honor the Chinese Communist revolution last year, even though 77 million innocent men, women and children were murdered under Mao Zedong. By contrast, the U.S. Postal Service is honoring Mother Teresa with a commemorative stamp.

Everyone is being asked to pass the word about our demonstration and to join us that evening. They are also being asked to write to Anthony Malkin.

His address is
Malkin Properties
One Grand Central Place
60, E. 42nd St.
 NY, NY 10165.

To sign our petition click here.

Protest over Empire State lighting heats up

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Day 8 of the protest campaign on behalf of Mother Teresa:

Today I am writing to the U.S. bishops in the Midwest notifying them that Anthony Malkin, the owner of the Empire State Building, has decided not to overrule those who have chosen to deny a tribute to Mother Teresa: our request to have the towers shine blue and white, the colors of her congregation, on August 26th, the 100th anniversary of her birth (and the day the U.S. Postal Service is honoring her with a commemorative stamp), was denied without explanation. Yet the same persons who chose to stiff Mother Teresa decided to honor the Chinese Communist revolution last year, even though 77 million innocent men, women and children were murdered under Mao Zedong.
Sign the petition to light The Empire State Building in honor of Mother Teresa here.

Everyone is being asked to sign our petition (click here), and to write to Anthony Malkin. His address is


 Malkin Properties,
One Grand Central Place
60, E. 42nd St.,
NY, NY 10165.

Media creates widening sex abuse scandal

You have to understand how the media manipulates what is reported, when and how its reported in oreder to see the hands which orchestrated the 'widening sex abuse crisis' in the Church. It is an attempt to silence the truth that the Church speaks. An inconvenient truth.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the latest developments in the sexual abuse scandal:

Every news story and commentary stating that the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church is widening is factually wrong. The evidence shows just the opposite—it has been contracting for approximately a quarter century. Here's the proof: the John Jay College of Criminal Justice—not exactly an arm of the Catholic Church—has shown repeatedly that the vast majority of the abuse cases took place from the mid-60s to the mid-80s. And the reports over the last five years show a rapid decline. The latest report, covering 2008-2009, shows exactly six credible allegations made against over 40,000 priests and tens of thousands of others working for the Catholic Church.
Almost all of the chatter about the alleged widening of the scandal is a direct result of media sensationalism. Here is a perfect example, taken from a Reuters story today. The headline reads, "Norway's Catholic Church Reveals New Abuse Cases." But what is new is not a new wave of incidents, rather it is an admission by the Norwegian Catholic Church of four cases of alleged abuse that it had not previously disclosed. Two of the cases date back to the 1950s; another dates back two decades; and the fourth one was based on "rumors."
The same Reuters story opens by saying these four stories come "two days after it [the Norwegian Catholic Church] revealed that a bishop who resigned last year did so after abusing an altar boy." That makes it sound like a Church cover-up. Only at the end of the story does the reader learn that the reason why this story did not emerge until this week is precisely because the victim initially asked that it not be made public.

There is no other religious or secular institution being cherry-picked by lawyers and the media like that of the Catholic Church. If what happened in the 1950s qualifies as news when it happened in the Catholic Church, then surely it would be news to learn of all those who were abused a half-century ago by ministers, rabbis, school teachers and others. But it will never happen—such news fails to make the media salivate.

New York Times unfairly attacking Pope Benedict

Catholic League president Bill Donohue takes on the New York Times:
On March 10, the New York Times ran an article on sex abuse in the Catholic Church stating that in Austria a priest abused a boy 40 years ago. Yesterday, readers learned of a German case where a man says he was abused in 1979. But when Rabbi Baruch Lebovits was found guilty last week on eight counts of sexually abusing a Brooklyn boy, the Times failed to report it. This is not an accident—it is deliberate.
Worse, on Saturday, the Times ran a front-page story saying that in 2002, when the sex abuse scandal in Boston hit, the pope—then Cardinal Ratzinger—"made statements that minimized the problem." No quotes or evidence of any kind were given. "Minimize the problem." Interesting phrase. In 2005, the Times reported that in 2002, Ratzinger believed that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty" of sex abuse (it was later found that 4 percent was a more accurate figure). The Times characterized his remark by saying he "appeared to minimize the problem." Looks like they got their talking points down just fine.

What the Times could have said over the weekend was that on January 9, 2002, three days after the Boston Globe broke the story on sex abuse, it ran a story reporting that Ratzinger had sent a letter to the bishops worldwide saying that "even a hint" of the sexual abuse of minors merited an investigation. But to do so would have compromised the conclusion it sought to reach.


If the Times were truly interested in eradicating sex abuse, it not only would report on cases like Rabbi Lebovits, it would not seek to protect the public school establishment. But it does. Here's the proof. Last year, there were two bills being debated in Albany on the subject of sex abuse: one targeted only private institutions like the Catholic Church, giving the public schools a pass; the other covered both private and public. The Times endorsed the former.

Contact NYT Public Editor Clark Hoyt: public@nytimes.com

Stupak under attack from NOW

from Bill Donohue of the Catholic League:

Mary Pollock, legislative vice president of the Michigan chapter of the National Organization for Women, yesterday accused Rep. Bart Stupak, a Catholic, of imposing his religious beliefs on the nation. “It is outrageous and un-American,” Pollock said of the pro-life congressman.

Commenting on this remark is Bill Donohue of the Catholic League:
Smear words have been used against virtually every religious, racial and ethnic group in American history. Fortunately, they are rarely voiced anymore. Unfortunately, it is still fair game in many quarters to indict Roman Catholics. One of the most vile canards ever invoked against Catholics is the rap that they are “un-American.” This bigoted slur has its origins in the early part of the 19th century. It is more than disconcerting—it is disgusting—that it is still being made against Catholics in 2010. That it should come from the mouth of a radical feminist activist is not wholly surprising, but it is reprehensible nonetheless.
As the clock winds down on the health care bill, anti-Catholicism is raising its ugly head with greater frequency. It is time for men and women of goodwill from all faith backgrounds, and on both sides of the abortion issue, to unequivocally denounce these bigoted expressions. What Mary Pollock said should be condemned by everyone.
Contact the Michigan president of NOW, Renee Beeker: Presidentminow@aol.com

Senate to vote on anti-Catholic bigot Dawn Johnsen

from Bill Donohue of the Catholic League:

After failing to win approval to head the Office of Legal Counsel in the Justice Department last year, Dawn Johnsen was renominated by President Obama this year. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved her; her nomination will now go before the full Senate

.In the minds of many, on both sides of the aisle, Dawn Johnsen is considered controversial for many reasons. Of interest to the Catholic League is one issue—her anti-Catholic bigotry.

In 1988, Dawn Johnsen worked on a brief, United States Catholic Conference v. Abortion Rights Mobilization, that sought to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status. The brief could have targeted all those religions which are anti-abortion, but it did not. Instead, it singled out the Catholic Church for punishment.
I am writing today to every member of the Senate asking just one question: Are you aware that Dawn Johnsen, who will soon be voted upon by the full Senate, sought to strip the Roman Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status in 1988?
My letter is intended as a big FYI.

Gloria Allred fighting Tebow Superbowl ad

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on an attempt by feminist lawyer Gloria Allred to get CBS to drop the pro-life Super Bowl ad featuring Tim Tebow and his mother:


Gloria Allred is no stranger to the subject of abortion, so it is not surprising that she wants to kill this pro-life ad. Her letter to Les Moonves of CBS, available at RadarOnline.com, wants the ad pulled because it is allegedly guilty of “misleading advertising.”

Allred, who has not seen the ad, charges that when Tebow’s mother was being advised by doctors in the Philippines to consider an abortion (she was on antibiotics for a pregnancy illness), it was illegal there to have one. In a monumental stretch, Allred reasons that the ad should disclose this information, otherwise it is “misleading.”

What is really misleading is Allred’s duplicity. Several years ago, she represented Amber Frey in a case related to the death of Laci Peterson; Peterson’s husband, Scott, was convicted of murdering both her and the baby she was carrying, a boy they named Connor. In an interview she gave to Hannity and Colmes on the Fox News Channel on June 5, 2003, Allred found it useful to her case to emphasize the humanness of Peterson’s baby: “And the fact that there are two individuals who are dead there, Laci and Connor, that has to be the most important consideration of everything.” For once, she was right.

Allred’s confession in 2003 undercuts her credibility—to say nothing of her ethical standing—to make the case against this Super Bowl ad. She knows that Tim Tebow is alive today because his mother did not abort him. To top it off, she can’t even deal respectfully with this issue. Her snide remark, which is in the letter to Moonves, is classic. “As the story is reported,” she says, “Tim’s mother decides to take her pregnancy to term anyway and give birth to Tim. Apparently they have lived happily ever after since that time.” And apparently, this woman has no shame.

Let CBS know of your support for this ad. Contact Leslie Moonves:
lmoonves@cbs.com

Jennings an anti-Catholic bigot

If we didn't have Bill Donohue to make a fuss when this type of outrage is uncovered, what would we do?

WHY DOES OBAMA LIKE KEVIN JENNINGS?

Catholic League president Bill Donohue speaks to the selection of Kevin Jennings as Director of the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools:

On September 23, I wrote a news release on the curious moral credentials of Kevin Jennings to be President Obama’s Safe Schools Czar: a former drug user and irresponsible teen counselor, he is also a Christian basher. What was not known at the time is that he is also a proud member of ACT UP, the homosexual urban terrorist group that broke into St. Patrick’s Cathedral in 1989 and disrupted Mass; the Eucharist was desecrated and obscene depictions of Cardinal O’Connor were posted.

Now a group called MassResistance, and the website WorldNetDaily, have exposed Jennings as a member of ACT UP. And he is no mere member: Jennings is listed as a donor to a sick display, “ACT UP New York: Activism, Art, and the AIDS Crisis, 1987-1993,” currently featured at the Harvard Art Museum. Harvard, of course, would never feature a display of Klan paraphernalia and say it was being done for the purpose of “dialogue.”

The real story here is not the corruption of Harvard—that’s old hat—the real story is the president of the United States choosing a morally challenged anti-Catholic homosexual to join his team. That Jennings belongs to, and sponsors, an urban terrorist organization, should alone disqualify him from public service at a municipal level. And remember, Obama did not choose him to monitor global cooling—he was chosen to instruct youth on moral matters.

Catholics deserve to know why Obama likes Jennings.

Will Obama keep his promise to keep abortion funding out of health care?

Catholic League president Bill Donohue offered the following remarks today on the health care bill:

Last week, President Obama said he would not support any health care bill that provided for federal funding of abortion. On Sunday, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius underscored his pledge. Now an amendment that would bar abortion funding from H.R. 3200 has been drafted by Congressmen Bart Stupak and Joe Pitts. On September 10, they sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, Chairwoman of the Rules Committee, asking that they allow all members of the U.S. House of Representatives “the right to vote their conscience” on this amendment.

President Obama did not mince words on this subject, and neither did Secretary Sebelius. Accordingly, we look for the president to publicly endorse this amendment, urging Congresswomen Pelosi and Slaughter to facilitate a House vote. This is a critical juncture—the time for the president to deliver on what he pledged is now. The Catholic community, in particular, anxiously awaits his next move.

Bill Donohue says Obama is deceitful about abortion in health care plan

From the Catholic League
OBAMA DENIES HEALTH PLAN COVERS ABORTION

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on President Obama’s speech last night on health care reform:

Yesterday, I said the president would not mention abortion in his speech. I was wrong about that. But I was right to say, “The rational thing to do would be to drop abortion from the health care bills and support conscience rights for health care workers.” Obama did nothing of the sort. Indeed, his one sentence denial that his health care proposals would result in federal funding of abortion is simply not true.

Even the New York Times, which issued a strong editorial endorsing his speech, said in a news analysis that his claim that there is no federal funding for abortion “is not so clear-cut.” In practice, the Times said, “the public and private money would all go into the same pot, and the source of money for any single procedure is largely a technicality.”

More pointedly, if there is no federal funding for abortion in these plans, then why have there been several attempts to bar such funding? Tell that to Rep. Bart Stupak, Rep. Joe Pitts, Rep. Eric Cantor, Rep. Sam Johnson, Sen. Orrin Hatch and Sen. Mike Enzi. Why would they seek to ban something that doesn’t exist? Just as revealing, why did Obama’s friends defeat every one of these amendments?

President Obama is playing a shell game. He defended the public option plan last night, and under that plan, the person in charge of deciding whether abortion coverage will be mandated is his Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. This is the same woman who befriended George Tiller, the infamous abortionist who specialized in killing babies 80-percent born. Is there anyone who doubts what her decision will be? If President Bush appointed a secretary of education who was pro-school vouchers, and an education plan allowed the secretary to decide whether to fund them, would anyone conclude that federal dollars for vouchers were not in the plan?

Being wrong is one thing. Being deceitful is quite another.

Defund Plannned Parenthood amendment vote failed

I learned Thursday night on a nationwide pro-life webcast that U.S Rep. Mike Pence's amendment to cut Planned Parenthood federal funding is going to receive a vote TODAY. The Pence Amendment would cut all Title X funding for Planned Parenthood, which amounts to over a third of their budget.
Please call your Congressman's office ASAP to let him know you want him to vote for Rep. Pence's amendment to defund Planned Parenthood.

UPDATE:
The vote failed because Democrates failed to join Republicans. IF your Democratic Congressman failed to vote for the defunding of Planned Parenthood, ask him or her why they are funding a business which maked milllions a year.
“The right to life is not a partisan issue, it is a moral one. The time has come for this Congress to come together in a bipartisan way to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves and to defend the rights of the taxpayer; The time has come to deny any and all federal funding for the Planned Parenthood," Pence added.
The most recent annual report shows Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business, received $350 million in taxpayer dollars from state, local and federal governments."
Here's a challenge from Bill Donohue:
"This is it. We are now at the defining moment. All the chatter about “common ground” on abortion will come to a conclusion today. Will those self-identified anti-abortion Catholic individuals and groups that have abandoned legal strategies to combat abortion take the position that Title X money should not wind up in the pocket of Planned Parenthood? While Title X does not provide funding for abortion, everyone knows that money is fungible: by giving Planned Parenthood Title X funding, it effectively underwrites its abortion clinics. "
Click here to see how your Congressman voted. Joe Courtney of the First District CT voted NO.
He'll be hearing from me.
Read the entire story on Life News.