Bill Donohue on the Mad Rush to Defend Roman Polanski

Bill Donohue joins the chorus of Catholics fascinated by the rise of a forgive and forget 30 year old child rape charge crowd.

The Catholic League has long suspected that, in many quarters, the outrage over priestly sexual abuse has had more to do with the status of the accused than the crime itself. Now the evidence is indisputable: a child can be drugged, penetrated and sodomized—and the guilty can cut and run—and still maintain hero status. Provided he is a celebrity.

Actress Debra Winger showed up at the Zurich Film Festival “to honor Roman Polanski as a great artist, but under these sudden and arcane circumstances, we can only think of him today as a human being.” Either that or as a child rapist. She was not alone: the Zurich Film Festival jury proudly displayed red badges reading “Free Polanski.” It was also nice to know that Woody Allen, a man who speaks from experience, came to Polanski’s defense.

Whoopi Goldberg showed off her usual brilliance when she declared that Polanski’s crime “wasn’t rape-rape.” No, only priests are guilty of real rape. Noted photographer Otto Weisser agrees: “He made a little mistake 32 years ago.” That’s right—it’s only a big mistake when priests do it. Richard Cohen of the Washington Post also notes that it’s been “over 30 years” since Polanski molested the girl. Similarly, movie critic Tom O’Neil exclaims that it is “mind-boggling why they’re still pursuing this.” Yet there is no statute of limitations afforded priests—men long dead have been accused of crimes extending back to the 1920s

Harvey Weinstein is so noble: “We’re calling on every film-maker we can to help fix this terrible situation.” The terrible situation, of course, isn’t what Polanski got away with—it’s his pursuit by the authorities. “To put him on trial or keep him in jail does not serve society in general or his victim in particular,” says journalist Anne Applebaum. She, and others, would carry more weight if the “he” included priests.

No wonder so many Americans look upon the celebrity worshippers with utter disdain. Double that for Catholics.

.

Polanski won't be experiencing the Kangaroo Courts and System of Justice Catholic priests are treated to when any drunk and druggie suddenly "remembers" he was abused 30 years ago -- and Polanski entered a plea of guilty.

I'm sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for the geniuses to make the determination that the people in Hollywood don't know the proper names of genitalia and rush Sister Weartheppants in with an anatomically correct doll on every Hollywood set.

Perhaps Jeffrey Anderson will line up women who'll tell their story to the Boston Globe about their terror in movie theaters and they all repeatedly chant "Debra Winger the pimp".

Any minute now, they could pull together a group named "Voice of the Moviegoers" whose motto will be "keep the pervs, change your sheets" and call for withholding admission fees.

This world cannot possibly get any more insane.

(Could it??)

****UPDATE: MORE CATHOLICS ARE KICKING UP DUST.

There are literally hundreds of Catholic priests who were yanked without any evidence whatsoever from their ministries and Hollywood is lobbying for the freedom and release of a fugitive from justice who plead guilty to raping and sodomizing a child after doping her up with drugs and liquor?

Please.

Liar from the beginning is up to his old tricks at Catholics United

Catholics United making things up about Sebelius

They are so weird.

Catholics United claims Sebelius is responsible for lowering the number of abortions in Kansas, even though abortions increased from 2005 to 2006, according to the Kansas state health department.

Kansas abortions declined last year, but Mary Kay Culp, the head of Kansans for Life, tells Lifenews.com that they reason they declined has nothing to do with the governor.

"One, abortions in Kansas went down in spite of, not in any way because of Kathleen Sebelius and any suggestion otherwise is purposely deceptive and insulting given her long and extreme pro-abortion record," she said.

"Abortions started going down when she was off being insurance commissioner and the 1997 Women's Right to Know law passed," Culp said of the bill that allowed women to know of abortion's risks and alternatives.

"After the 1998 law banning abortions of viable babies was passed, however, such abortions actually went up because exceptions to the 'ban' were illegally exploited by late-term abortionist Tiller and Planned Parenthood," she added. "It wasn't until Phill Kline announced for and then became attorney general saying he intended to enforce Kansas late-term abortion laws that they came down and came down hard--now by almost 60%."

Culp also takes issue with the fake Catholic group saying that Sebelius went out of her way to sign pro-life laws.

"This is not true. She has never, ever worked for such legislation, and only signed it when forced to," Culp said.

Bill Donohue is out in the public square explaining why a proabort zealot is an insult to Roman Catholics.

Obama, U.N. Population Fund, forced abortions

It's really lucky for Obama that people are so dumbed down, they can only scratch the surface of his soundbytes.

Let's end the political stigma of abortion by tapping into the stream of forced sterilizations and forced steriliations. What a guy.


From Bill Donohue:

On January 24, President Obama said, “I look forward to working with Congress to restore U.S. financial support for the U.N. Population Fund.” He pledged to do this “in the coming weeks,” maintaining that “It is time that we end the politicization of this [abortion] issue.”

Bill Donohue explains the Catholic League’s response:

“The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) claims that it is not pro-abortion. It says that it merely supports ‘reproductive rights.’ Not quite. Starting in 1979, in the first five years of China’s draconian one-child policy, UNFPA gave the program $50 million. To accomplish this goal over the years, which is still ongoing, IUDs have been forced into the wombs of hundreds of millions of women against their will. Indeed, no coercive method is considered taboo, including forced abortion. It was for reasons like these that in 2002 the U.S. State Department blasted China for its affront to human rights. Indeed, Secretary Colin Powell backed the Bush administration’s denial of funds to UNFPA.

“The one-child policy has abetted female infanticide, so much so that there has been a massive decrease in the female population—there are now an estimated 350 million girls missing from China. Other non-white areas of the world where UNFPA concentrates its efforts include Vietnam, Nigeria and Peru. But it can be multicultural: When the genocidal maniac from Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, wanted to tame his people, he invited UNFPA to help reduce the population of Kosovo; he wasn’t unhappy with the results, nor, of course, the means.

“So here we have it. In the name of women’s rights, UNFPA undercuts women. In the name of eradicating poverty, it eradicates the poor. Moreover, it works closely with anti-Catholic groups. And now Obama wants us to bankroll UNFPA. During a recession, no less. To top things off, he is doing all of this in the name of ending the politicization of issues that he says marked previous administrations. The ironies are as endless as they are priceless.”

Freedom of Religion

Why is this Attorney General not enforcing the law?

From Bill Donohue:

On Sunday, November 9, a band of about 30 gays stormed a church in Lansing, Michigan. Some were well dressed and were stationed inside Mount Hope Church; others were outside dressed in pink and black. The group of self-described homosexual anarchists, Bash Back!, claims the evangelical church is guilty of “transphobia and homophobia.”

The protesters outside the church were beating on buckets, shouting “Jesus was a homo” on a megaphone and carrying an upside-down pink cross. Fire alarms went off inside the church, protesters stormed the pulpit and a huge rainbow-colored flag was unfurled with the inscription, “IT’S OKAY TO BE GAY! BASH BACK!” The church was vandalized, obscenities were shouted and worshippers were confronted. There were no arrests.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this issue today:

“The real story here is the refusal of the mainstream media to cover what is surely one of the most disturbing events of 2008. If an organized group of gay bashers stormed a gay church, there is not a single sentient person in the United States who wouldn’t know about it.

“This is urban fascism come to America’s heartland. It must be quickly stopped before it gets out of control. We are contacting Mike Cox, the Attorney General of Michigan, calling for an investigation.”

Please contact Mike Cox at miag@michigan.gov

Here was my email to Mr. Cox:

Dear Mr. Cox,

The below incidence is against the constitutional freedom to worship.

My family experienced similar assaults upon our peace by kooks with megaphones who stormed inside and out, threatened our children, our peace, our prayer, our Holy Sacrifice. While my children were altar serving an Archbishop, he instructed the police not to shoot back if they pulled out weapons. The verbal and threatening violence outside and in waxed and waned but more than once, my children were instructed to hit the floor, find a pew and hide under it if things escalated. The police stood by and did nothing - as did the attorney general and all the politicians in Boston.

Can you help me to understand why you are not enforcing the law?

Carol McKinley
Boston, MA
#781-###-###3

Send Mr. Cox a letter, circulate and encourage others to do the same...

Bill Donohue Parody, we're antiracist but support david duke

The following is a tongue-in-cheek reply to Nick Cafardi's article, "I'm Catholic, Staunchly Anti-Abortion, and Support Obama.":

Duke's support for racist rights has led some to the conclusion that no Catholic can vote for him. That's a mistake. While I have never swayed in my conviction that racism is an unspeakable evil, I believe that we have lost the racism battle -- permanently. A vote for Duke's opponent does not guarantee the end of racism in America. Not even close.

Let's suppose the 1964 Civil Rights Act is overturned. What would happen? The matter would simply be kicked back to the states -- where it was before 1964. Overturning the 1964 Civil Rights Act would not abolish racism. It would just mean that racism would be legal in some states and illegal in others. The number of racist incidents would remain unchanged as long as people could travel.

Duke's opponent has promised to appoint "judicially activist" judges who would presumably vote not to overturn the 1964 Civil Rights Act. But is that sufficient reason for a Catholic to vote for him? To answer that question, let's look at the rest of the Church's list of intrinsically evil acts.

Both Duke and his opponent get failing marks on embryonic stem cell research, which Catholic teaching opposes. The last time the issue was up for a vote in the Senate, both men voted to ease existing restrictions.

There's another distinction that is often lost in the culture-war rhetoric on racism: There is a difference between being pro-choice (e.g., the right to choose racist practices) and being pro-racism. Duke supports government action that would reduce the number of racist incidents, and has consistently said that "we should do everything we can to avoid unprovoked confrontations that might even lead somebody to consider racist behavior." He favors a "comprehensive approach . . . where we teach the tenets of civility to our children." And he wants to ensure that therapy is an option for bigots who might otherwise choose to commit a racist act.

What's more, as recent data show, racist incidents drop when the social safety net is strengthened. If Duke's economic program will do more to reduce racism that his opponent's, then is it wrong to conclude that a Duke presidency will also reduce racism? Not at all.

Every faithful Catholic agrees racism is an unspeakable evil that must be minimized, if not eliminated. I can help to achieve that without endorsing the immoral baggage associated with the party of Duke's opponent. Sustaining the 1964 Civil Rights Act is not the only way to end racism, and a vote for Duke is not somehow un-Catholic.

The U.S. bishops have urged a "different kind of political engagement," one that is "shaped by the moral convictions of well-formed consciences." I have informed my conscience. I have weighed the facts. I have used my prudential judgment. And I conclude that it is a proper moral choice for this Catholic to support David Duke's candidacy.

Racism is nothing compared to the lunacy casting a vote for a defender of a right to commit homicide on an infant by decapitation, quartering by suction while alive or chemical burning unto death. Shame on Kmiec and Carfardi.