Bill Donohue

As far back as 2007, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League had been calling John Hagee a "veteran bigot" for statements he had made about the Catholic Church, calling it, among other things ""The Great Whore," an "apostate church," the "anti-Christ," and a "false cult system."

When John McCain received Hagee's endorsement last year, Donohue was livid and demanded that McCain reject the endorsement, which McCain eventually did. But in the months in between, something odd happened: Hagee and Donohue became friends.

Hagee apologized to Donohue and Donohue was quite pleased with himself with how he had managed to make Hagee grovel:

It’s been going on for weeks. A lot of Catholic activist friends of mine and some evangelicals have been powwowing with [Hagee] in Washington. They asked me to meet with Hagee and I said no several times. I’m not interested in meeting with him until I get what I want, a public statement and apology that’s complete and speaks specifically to these black legends about Catholics-Jewish relations, and the Holocaust in particular. And once that’s accomplished, I’ll be glad to meet with him. Now that’s going to happen on Thursday.

Quite frankly, I didn’t think that I would get something this complete. What I did not want to get was this “If you’ve been offended, I’m sorry.” I wanted something more specific. There’s no substitute for personal interaction, when you have people sitting down with you and explaining how you’ve been hurtful. Now we can bury this hatchet. It’s rather dramatic….

What really got me offended was the idea of “I’m the purist Christian on the block” when he’s talking to Jews—“I’m not out there persecuting the Jews like all these Catholics.” I’m sure we’ve seen the last of that.

But once Donohue had been placated, the two became fast friends and alies.  And now Dan Gilgoff reports that Hagee is working closely with Donohue to expand the scope of his Christians United for Israel:

CUFI has recently stepped up outreach to Catholics. What precipitated that , and how is the effort going so far? What are your goals for that outreach?

Yes, we are reaching out to Catholics. These efforts started last year, during the presidential campaign, when Bill Donahue of the Catholic League claimed that I had slighted the Catholic Church while teaching from the Book of Revelation. He was mistaken on this point. But he and I handled this disagreement the way that Christians should. We met. We had fellowship. We learned from one another. A few months after the controversy, he came to our Washington, D.C., Summit as my guest. When I recognized him during my keynote address, he received a rousing ovation from our CUFI audience. I consider him a friend.

Bill and I decided that we should turn our personal reconciliation into a broader reconciliation. We decided to try to bring Catholics and Protestants together on behalf of Israel. Some of Israel's best friends and strongest defenders are devout Catholics. They should be a part of this movement.

Interestingly, Hagee insists that he and Donohue buried the hatchet after he explained that Donohue was "mistaken" about what he had said about the Catholic Church, whereas Donohue insisted that they did so after Hagee had abjectly apologized for his past statements. 

So which was it?  I'd like to know.

Not that I'll ever find out, mind you, because I am undoubtedly among those whom Hagee insists "believe some of the lies that were told about me during the campaign [who were] probably not my friends to begin with."

• Any bets on how long it'll be before Sen. John Cornyn apologizes to Rush Limbaugh?
• The Thomas More Society is calling on Notre Dame to drop trespassing charges against two protesters arrested during events surrounding President Obama's speech while Alan Keyes court appearance stemming from his own arrests has been pushed back to June 3.
• Focus on the Family actually has some praise for the White House after participating in a meeting on how to better serve the needs of kids in foster care.
• Liberty University is going to be filing its own complaint against Americans United in response to AU's request that the IRS review Liberty's tax-exempt status.
• If there is ever an opportunity for the Alliance Defense Fund to push its way into legal fights over marriage equality, you can rest assured that that is what it will do.
• Are La Raza and The Federalist Society even remotely similar?
• Bill Donohue says he's quietly rooting for Sotomayor, while William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC, is not, judging by the fact that he is calling her a "Hispanic supremacist."

• Good As You smartly notes that at least some marriage equality opponents are now "coming out and admitting the truth: That rallies designed to keep gay folks from legally marrying are NOT 'protect marriage' rallies -- they are ANTI GAY RALLIES!"
• A new Media Matters analysis finds that in the week following Justice David Souter's retirement announcement, significantly more Republican members of Congress, especially on Fox News, participated in daytime cable news discussions about or touching on the Supreme Court than did Democratic members of Congress and Obama administration officials.
• Also via Media Matters, we have to wonder just what the deal is with Bill O'Reilly's obsession with "interspecies marriages."
• Rob Boston tells Bill Donohue to calm down because "Angles and Demons" is only a movie.
• Eric Boehlert chronicles how, since switching parties, Arlen Specter has been getting a taste of the GOP Noise Machine.
• Finally, I have to say that I am rather surprised that the Illinois Family Institute actually issued a correction after Box Turtle Bulletin pointed out that they were wrong about the APA's definition of "sexual orientation."

Honestly, I am so tired of having to write about the constant stream of lies and misrepresentations from the Religious Right about hate crimes legislation.  If I never had to write about this issue again, I would be eternally grateful… but since they keep egregiously lying about it, it doesn’t look like that will happen any time soon.

Here is the latest example, compliments of Bill Donohue and the Catholic League:

The driving force behind the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act is the desire to provide additional penalties to criminals who assault homosexuals because of their sexual orientation. Without commenting on the propriety of hate crimes legislation in general, the central problem with this bill is its chilling effect on religious speech.

To be specific, the bill would criminalize religious speech that was critical of homosexuality if it were linked to a crime against a gay person. How do I know this? Because when the bill was considered in the House, that is exactly what Rep. Louie Gohmert was told when he raised this issue. While assaulting anyone, independent of sexual orientation, is rightly considered a criminal offense, the prospect of criminalizing religious speech that proscribes certain sexual practices is beyond worrisome--it is downright dangerous.

Let’s apply the simple test I laid out yesterday whereby we replace the references to “sexual orientation” with references to religion, as religion is already protected under existing hate crimes laws, to see if the concerns still hold up:

The driving force behind the Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Prevention Act is the desire to provide additional penalties to criminals who assault CHRISTIANS because of their RELIGIOUS orientation. Without commenting on the propriety of hate crimes legislation in general, the central problem with this bill is its chilling effect on FREE speech.

To be specific, the bill would criminalize FREE speech that was critical of CHRISTIANITY if it were linked to a crime against a CHRISTIAN person. How do I know this? Because when the bill was considered in the House, that is exactly what Rep. Louie Gohmert was told when he raised this issue. While assaulting anyone, independent of RELIGIOUS orientation, is rightly considered a criminal offense, the prospect of criminalizing FREE speech that proscribes certain RELIGIOUS practices is beyond worrisome--it is downright dangerous.

Now, when looked at this way, it quickly become obvious that all these sorts of concerns are completely overblown because current hate crimes law already applies to violent crimes targeting religion and people are not being charged with hate crimes for criticizing religion or seeing their free speech rights wiped away.  

This sort of flagrant and intentional misrepresentation of the legislation is bad enough, but I don’t even know what to say about this demand:

The First Amendment protects freedom of speech and religious liberty, both of which are jeopardized under this bill. The chilling effect this legislation could have on the right of the clergy to address sinful behavior flies in the face of the spirit of the First Amendment. Surely there are ways to protect homosexuals from being singled out by anti-gay thugs without trespassing on the constitutional rights of priests, ministers, rabbis, imams and others. Accordingly, language that would accomplish this end should be included as an amendment.

Has anyone at the Catholic League even bothered to take a look at the legislation?  If not, here it is and guess what is says?

SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by, the Constitution.

That’s right – aside from the fact that First Amendment rights are in no way threatened by the legislation, the authors also added explicit protection for them just to make that clear.

But still the Religious Right is claiming that the legislation does things is patently does not do and claiming that it doesn’t contain protections that is clearly does.  

Do you have any idea how much easier my job would be if the Religious Right would be willing to do some basic research before spouting off?

One of the rare pleasures of watching the Religious Right incessantly criticize everyone who doesn't share their views and regularly accuse everyone else of insulting God is when they stop aiming those attacks at Democrats and liberals for one moment to and start attacking each other.

And that seems to be what is happening between Randall Terry and Bill Donohue over the proper response to President Obama's speech at Notre Dame.

Terry, who re-located to South Bend last month from where he is leading protests and efforts to get Obama's speech canceled, was outraged when Bishop John D'Arcy called on Catholics not to protest the school or the speech:

I urge all Catholics and others of good will to stay away from unseemly and unhelpful demonstrations against our nation’s President or Notre Dame or Father John I. Jenkins, C.S.C.

The Notre Dame community is well-equipped to supervise and support discussions and prayer within their own campus.

I had a positive meeting this week with Father Jenkins, and I expect further dialogue will continue. These are days of prayer and hope when we should turn to the Risen Christ for light and wisdom.

Let us all work towards a peaceful graduation experience for the Class of 2009 at our beloved Notre Dame.

Of course, Terry was not going to take that lying down so he wrote an op-ed lecturing D'Arcy on Catholic teachings and accusing him of selling out both the unborn and Jesus Christ:

Peter boldly swore that he would not deny Christ; D’Arcy boldly declared he would not deny the value of innocent lives for the sake of prestige. But now D’Arcy wavers before Pilate (don’t protest Obama), confirms Judas (don’t protest Jenkins), and abandons Christ in the babies (don’t show pictures of dead babies, don’t cry out against their murder).

In his printed statements urging us to forgo demonstrations, he does not even mention the babies dying at Obama’s command. Let us pray that even as Peter met the eyes of the suffering Christ – and Peter’s heart was broken as he wept bitter tears – that Bishop D’Arcy meets the eyes of the babies condemned to a brutal death by the man he now suggests we do not protest.

...

This I know for certain: D’Arcy has stepped far beyond his canonical authority by urging the faithful to abandon the babies – and thereby abandon Christ – and to honor Obama and Jenkins with our silent cooperation. We do not deny D’Arcy’s right to question certain tactics, but he has gone far beyond that. He has asked us to commit the sins of omission and silence. Respectfully, we will not.

And then, of course, Bill Donohue just had to weigh in to blast Terry's "arrogance on stilts" and challenge his right to criticize D'Arcy since he's only been Catholic for a few years:

Terry just became a Catholic in 2005 and now he is an authority on canon law. Worse, he accuses Bishop D’Arcy, who is strongly pro-life, of abandoning babies and Christ.

The problem with pro-life zealots is that they expect everyone to line up single file and do exactly what they want. Thus do they play to the worst stereotype floated by the pro-abortion camp. Terry needs to take a deep breath and get off his high horse.

Like I said, we see the Right flinging around accusations of zealotry, hypocrisy, and the abandonment of Christ just about every day ... but its a rare treat when they aim them at one another for a change.

• Mary E. Hunt explains that the Cardinal Newman Society, which has been leading the outrage against Notre Dame's invitation to President Obama, is really just a small group that  "monitors speakers, professors, students, and organizations on all the campuses and squeals every time its version of Catholic orthodoxy is transgressed," and is especially obsessed with "The Vagina Monologues."
• Speaking of Catholics, Joe Sudbay notes that, according to a new Gallup poll, they are actually more liberal on a range of social issues than are non-Catholics, meaning that it is people like Bill Donohue who are out of the mainstream.
• Good As You catches the Traditional Values Coalition comparing Obama to Nazis.
• AU reports that 77-year-old retired public school teacher Chuck Sheldon, founder and executive director of the group Our Godly American Heritage, is on a crusade to get the Bible to be taught in Idaho’s schools.
• Finally, Pam's House Blend had a couple of good posts:  the first noting that Sarah Palin's new Attorney General has a rather rabidly anti-gay past; and the second noting that Focus on the Family is trumpeting a bunch of unsubstantiated anecdotes in order to whip up fear over efforts to provide equality.

If history is any guide, any time there has been any criticism of the Catholic Church, you could count on Bill Donohue to come riding in to defend the church and attack all those leveling the criticism - just as he did when former Rep. Mark Foley claimed he had been molested as a teenager and Donohue responded by blaming Foley for being so weak.

So the only surprise involved in this latest statement from Donohue on the controversy stemming from the fact that Pope Benedict recently lifted the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying priest is that it took him as long as it did to weigh in. Donohue dismisses the entire thing as "nonsense" and then proceeds to criticize all the Jews who dared to voice outrage at the move:

"None of the media distortions of this issue excuses those in the Jewish community who have lashed out at the pope. They should know better. Is their commitment to good relations with Catholics so thin that it can wither because of something like this? We certainly hope not."

You know who should know better?  Bill Donohue.  After all, he's not exactly the poster boy for maintaining "good relations" between Catholics and Jews, considering that he's prone to making statements such as this:

Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It‘s not a secret, OK? And I‘m not afraid to say it.

Ever since it was announced that Rev. Gene Robinson would be participating in the Inaugural festivities, Religious Right leaders, many of whom were initially thrilled when they found out that Rick Warren was to be involved, have become decidedly less thrilled about the whole thing.

As we've noted previously, Tony Perkins called it a move "designed to placate angry liberals" while Bill Donohue complained that "Obama has chosen a man who offends Catholics as much as he does Protestants. If that’s his idea of inclusion, he can keep it. " Peter LaBarbara called it "an affront to faithful Christians and religious defenders of morality everywhere" and Matt Barber saw it as a betrayal of Christian voters.

Now, as Inauguration Day approaches, others are jumping on the bandwagon and revving up the radical rhetoric, with Rick Scarborough calling it a blatant "slap in the face":

Bishop Gene Robinson is supposed to help unite the country? Give me a break ... For Christians, THIS invitation was a slap in the face. Bishop Robinson’s choices are completely against the Bible he supposedly represents. The sin of homosexuality is rebellion against God’s Holy Word. It is one of the most tragic of the lies that Satan perpetrates on the human race ...Let’s also remember to pray for our new president. That God will change his heart on the issue of homosexuality. That he will see it for what it is: a sin and an affront to the God on whom this nation was founded. That he will have the courage not to be swayed by an outspoken, belligerent minority. That he will have enough fear of a Holy God that he will stand boldly and courageously for what is right.

Never one to be outdone, Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission is telling parents not to let their children watch what will be the "most perverted [inauguration] in our nation’s history" and warns that God just might destroy the nation's capital because of it:

The inauguration of Barack Obama as the President of the United States is going to be historic for many reasons, not all of them good. Obama’s inauguration may help move race relations forward in America, but Obama’s inaugural events are a major step backwards for historic Christian values. CADC must issue this WARNING message: Don’t let your children watch!

National events ought to unify and elevate the nation by celebrating what is virtuous, such as God and patriotism. Obama is making a terrible mistake by polluting his inaugural events with sexual sin. Some one ought to remind him that he wasn’t elected mayor of Sodom.

Barack Obama’s inauguration will have the dubious distinction of being the most perverted in our nation’s history ... In order to be consistent in using this kind of reasoning, Obama ought to have a stripper lead off the inaugural parade followed by the Hell’s Angel’s Motorcycle Drill Team followed by the Crips Precision Handgun Corp. and the Transvestite Fashion Police. Just because something exists in society does not mean it is good and is to be paraded in front of everyone, especially children.

On this historic occasion of the Inauguration of the 44th President of the United States, I must unfortunately recommend that you keep the kids away from the TV and pray that God will not rain fire and brimstone down on Washington DC.

According to exit polls, 54% of Catholics voted for Barack Obama in last Tuesday's election.  And according to South Carolina Roman Catholic priest Jay Scott Newman they will all be denied communion at this church unless they repent for their sinful vote:

The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed Sunday to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.

"Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president," Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.

"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."

How long before the Catholic League's Bill Donohue comes rushing to Newman's defense, screaming "anti-Catholic bigotry," once the inevitable backlash starts?