White Liberals Are Clueless About Crime

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

Paul Pelosi gets hit in the head with a hammer and everyone is going bonkers. Those who habitually condemn crime are not the hypocrites. No, that honor goes to those who hate cops, promote cashless bail, elect Soros-funded District Attorneys, want to defund the police and empty the prisons. And according to their ideological leanings, that makes them classists—they discriminate in favor of the upper class. Had Paul Pelosi been the mailman they wouldn’t have cared.

White liberals just don’t get it. Want proof? Read the latest Pew Research Center survey on violent crime.

When asked is violent crime very important in making your decision to vote in the midterm elections, 56% of whites said yes. The figure for Hispanics was 65%. For blacks, 81% say violent crime is a very important issue.

These results dovetail with who is the most likely to be a victim of violent crime. Blacks are victimized the most and whites the least. This is not due to racism: most of the victimizers of blacks are black.

The white liberals who work at Pew are among the clueless. They delight in telling us that recent data show no recent increase in violent crime (though admitting that murder is increasing). Thus do they play into the narrative, promoted most visibly by New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, that the perception of increasing crime does not match the reality of it.

This is all nonsense. Most white liberals do not know cops, much less speak to them. They should. They would learn that if cops do their job they may lose it, and if they don’t do their job they will keep it. That’s not an exaggeration.

Think of it this way. Let’s say a cop is three years from retirement (most are taking early retirement due to the anti-cop environment), and he comes home to his wife explaining that he was called on the carpet for a minor infraction while apprehending a dangerous criminal. Is she not likely to advise him to just look away the next time he sees trouble brewing? Why risk their livelihood?

That’s just how pro-criminal the criminal justice system is these days. During the 2020 riots, cops were told to stand down. Nothing has changed since. The number of arrests that are not made—but should be made—never show up in the official statistics, the data that so impress white liberals. In other words, less arrests may give the appearance of less crime, but they mask what is going on in the streets.

Moreover, in places like New York City there are no more undercover cops. The thugs know it, which is why they do what they do. They can get away with it. If they are caught, they are back on the street before the arresting officer completes the paper work. They then go back to doing what they do.

Shooting victims are up 71% in New York City from 2019 to 2022, the years when Kathy Hochul was lieutenant governor and then governor. Larcenies are up 29%, murder is up 32%, felony assault is up 24%, burglary is up 49%, and auto theft is up 148%. Yet Ms. Clueless has the audacity to ask why crime is considered so important.

Hochul should go into black neighborhoods and berate them for being so hyper-sensitive about crime. In fact, she needs to look them in the eye and tell the 81% who say crime is “very important” to them that they are delusional. Then she needs to ride the subway at night all alone, without security detail.

Crime statistics are important, but they don’t tell it all. What is driving the fear these days is something which doesn’t show up in official statistics, namely the increase in totally random attacks.

People who are walking down the street minding their own business are having their faces ripped open with box cutters, for no reason whatsoever. We understand muggers who rob a woman’s purse. We understand gangs. We don’t understand total strangers pushing innocent people into oncoming trains.

Hochul should ask all those black New Yorkers who are now taking the Long Island Rail Road to work. Why did they switch from taking the subway? After all, the LIRR is so much more expensive. She has much to learn.

What happened to Paul Pelosi was despicable. What is happening every day to blacks is worse, and that is because the crime wave is a function of policy: The crime policies that white liberals have instituted are directly responsible for the spike in violent crimes.

The battle over parents’ rights in education is just getting started

Schools are promoting the notion that some kids – perhaps many kids if recent trends continue – are born in the wrong body. Suddenly, from Florida to Texas to Wyoming, parents are discovering that schools are teaching, seemingly across the curriculum, that an internal sense of gender trumps biological sex. Worse, some schools are changing, at their students’ request – but without their parents’ knowledge or consent – their students’ names and pronouns to conform to a child’s surprising new “gender identity.” When parents come to school board meetings to complain, far too many are met with silence or risible accusations that they are politicizing education. Parents have the primary right and responsibility to raise and teach their children. Many parents delegate part of the teaching task to schools, in an act of trust. Rather than acting as faithful stewards of that trust, too many schools have decided that it’s their job to alienate kids from “regressive” views of their parents. Is it any wonder that this has proved controversial? We could dissipate some of the heat by increasing the rights of parents over their children’s schooling. States should connect school money to children, rather than to school buildings. Universal school choice for everyone – rich and poor, conservative and liberal – would not just make schools better and more competitive. It would make them less of an arena for the culture war that is otherwise roiling our culture. Heritage Expert: Jay Richards

Robert Jeffress is Right: It’s Time to Embrace Christian Nationalism (Correctly Defined) - The Stream

Robert Jeffress is Right: It’s Time to Embrace Christian Nationalism (Correctly Defined) - The Stream: 'Christian Nationalism' isn't some extremist theory, but a term that describes the common beliefs of most U.S. presidents before 1980.

Post-birth abortion in California?

Post-birth Abortions? https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/, Why Yes of course. This week we visit with Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI.org) on California’s new abortion law that actually decriminalizes the murder of newborns for 30 days after birth. In fact, no investigation may be conducted into the cause of those deaths. Join Deacon Mike and Gina for an eye-opening discussion with a true pro-life advocate. Faith On Trial is broadcast over the Iowa Catholic Radio network every Thursday morning then posted as a podcast.

The Constitution: Presidential Powers

California Court Delivers Victory for Cake Artist Targeted for Religious Discrimination

Cake designer Cathy Miller has been vindicated in the California courts for practicing her Christian principles on the job. On October 21, 2022, attorneys from the Thomas More Society brought home a First Amendment victory for the cake shop owner of Tastries, a popular Bakersfield, California bakery that was targeted by gay activists. The ruling, handed down by Judge Eric Bradshaw of the Superior Court of California in Kern County, decided for Miller in a lawsuit brought against her by the Department of Fair Housing and Employment.

“We applaud the court for this decision,” stated Thomas More Society Special Counsel Charles LiMandri, partner at LiMandri & Jonna LLP. “The freedom to practice one’s religion is enshrined in the First Amendment, and the United States Supreme Court has long upheld the freedom of artistic expression.”

Miller had been the target of multiple lawsuits after a lesbian couple asked her to create a wedding cake and she referred them to another baker. Miller’s polite refusal to design a custom cake for a homosexual union was rooted in her sincere religious belief that marriage is intended to be between one man and one woman.

The legal action against Cathy’s Creations, Inc., brought by the Department of Fair Housing and Employment was filed under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, which provides protection from discrimination by business establishments on the basis of race, ethnicity, or religion.

“There’s a certain irony there, observed Paul Jonna, Thomas More Society Special Counsel and partner at LiMandri & Jonna LLP “that a law intended to protect individuals from religious discrimination was used to discriminate against Cathy for her religious beliefs.”

Jonna also pointed out that Miller does not have fringe beliefs.

“Cathy believes in the Bible,” said Jonna, and recalled how Miller was harassed by opposing attorneys for her adherence to its teachings.

A February 24, 2022, deposition in the case records an attorney for the state needling Miller:

Attorney Gregory Mann (attorney for the state): Do you try to follow everything that the Bible says?

Cathy Miller: I do my best, but I’m a sinner, but I do my best.

Mann: Do you follow some of the eating practices from the Old Testament in terms of not eating pigs, not eating shellfish, et cetera?

“The state was actually questioning the sincerity of Cathy’s faith,” remarked Jonna, noting the Tastries is bountifully adorned with Christian décor, and even plays Christian music over its audio system.

“The fact that they called Miller’s open and sincerely held beliefs into question is almost as disturbing as quibbling over her status as an artist,” Jonna commented.

The Institute of Culinary Education clearly labels cake designers as “cake artists” who practice the “Art of Cake Decorating,” and observes that cakes have a known history dating back to ancient Egypt and are created with the finest and most expensive ingredients as an “act of celebration.”

It was this celebration of a marriage between two people of the same sex, that Miller could not condone in accordance with her Christian beliefs, explained LiMandri, during the July 25, 2022, closing arguments before Judge Bradshaw.

Miller would have been happy to sell the two women a pre-made cake, added LiMandri, but declined to grace their celebration with her personal artistry in a custom cake, which would be tantamount to approval, which Miller could not give.

Read the decision issued on October 21, 2022, 2022, issued by Judge J. Eric Bradshaw of the Superior Court of California, County of Kern, in Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Cathy’s Creations here.

6 Stunning Stories of Satanists, Witches, and Psychics Who Abandoned the Occult — and Found Jesus - The Stream

6 Stunning Stories of Satanists, Witches, and Psychics Who Abandoned the Occult — and Found Jesus - The Stream: Six stunning stories of satanists, witches, and psychics who abandoned the occult and found Jesus.

Abortion On The Ballot In Five States

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

In August, voters in Kansas turned back an effort to amend the state constitution: it would have declared there is no right to an abortion. Now voters in five other states will decide to expand or contract abortion rights.

Pro-life activists in Kentucky hope to do what the voters in Kansas decided against, making sure there is nothing in the state constitution that creates a right to abortion or requires government funding of abortions.

Voters in Montana will decide whether to legalize selective infanticide. To be specific, the ballot initiative states that infants born alive are legal persons and therefore cannot be denied medical care. It matters not a whit if the baby survived as a result of induced labor, cesarean section, attempted abortion, or some other means.

Voters in California, Michigan and Vermont will decide if they want to effectively ban all abortion restrictions.

California voters will decide if their state constitution should be amended to ensure that the state cannot restrict abortions for any reason. California bishops have spoken out against Proposition 1, saying it would provide for late-term abortions (which most Californians do not support). Gov. Gavin Newsom, who says he is a Catholic, spent $2.5 million over two weeks on ads imploring Californians to vote for the pro-abortion measure.

If Proposition 3 in Michigan succeeds, it means the evisceration of parental rights; it would invalidate state law and allow minors to get an abortion without the consent of one of their parents. It would also allow for abortion at any time of pregnancy and do away with all abortion regulations. Michigan bishops have branded it the “most extreme proposal” the nation has ever seen.

Vermont already has very liberal abortion laws. On the ballot is a provision, Proposal 5, that would ensure abortion-on-demand right up until the moment of birth. It wants to declare a state constitutional right to “personal reproductive autonomy.”

Do any of these laws matter? Absolutely. An analysis by the New York Times on October 31 found that there has been a 6% drop in abortions nationwide after Roe v. Wade was overturned. Thirteen states banned or severely restricted abortion; nine others added major restrictions. Some states witnessed an increase in abortion, as women seeking to terminate their pregnancy traveled from restrictive states to more liberal states.

Statistics can be cold. The 6% drop in abortions amounts to over 10,000 children who have been spared sudden death.

No state saw a more dramatic decline in abortions than Texas. Kudos to those men and women who stood up for the rights of the unborn. They are a role model for us all.

Exorcist takes to TikTok to protect kids from Occult

Monsignor Stephen Rossetti, the chief exorcist of the Archdiocese of Washington, started a TikTok channel last month when it came to his attention that the popular social media platform was exposing kids trends like “WitchTok,” introducing them to the dangerous world of the occult. Rossetti has already gained thousands of followers on social media after sharing the wisdom he has gained as an exorcist.  READ

Family fights back

A Vermont school district punished both 14-year-old Blake Allen and her father for stating that a biologically male student who identifies as a transgender girl is male. Now the Allens are suing the school district—and accusing it of retaliating against their family for speaking out.  READ

The DEI Disaster

Disastrous’: ‘trans’ child taken from parents

The Court of Appeals of Indiana on Friday affirmed a trial court decision removing a 17-year-old minor from the custody of his parents for their refusal to “affirm” his “female gender identity.” “The case displays the messy, personal qualities in a gender identity crisis, as well as the disastrous implications of permitting the transgender ideology to gain a foothold in law,” writes Joshua Arnold.  READ

Attempt to spike book on Amy Coney Barrett

Roughly 500 members of the literary community published a letter asking Penguin Random House not to publish Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s forthcoming book. The signatories begin their letter by claiming to “care deeply about freedom of speech,” but go on to assert that publishing Barrett’s book would constitute an “assault on inalienable human rights” because she voted to overturn Roe vs. Wade.   READ

As Biden’s DOJ Plays Hardball… The Good Guys Can Still Win

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – One of the festering problems bubbling up across the nation concerns the treatment of children who might have gender dysphoria. Much of the concern deals with how the teachers’ unions and some social service agencies handle the problem which, for far too many kids trapped in the situation, is more of a phase they go through rather than any real medical or psychological problems.

Thus as the liberal left has enshrined itself as the arbiter of good and evil, to which all must bow down, normal childhood development is overlooked in favor of an ongoing quest for the oxymoronic notion involved in something called “social justice.”

We have watched this played out for far too long. But the basic template goes something like this: Schools, social workers, and librarians, as the aforesaid arbiters of good and evil, have determined that gender is a fluid state which can be changed at will when needed to do so. The result is that children, often those associated with loneliness, shyness, an inferiority complex, or the like — which may be caused by many factors from family dynamics to a physical handicap — are seized upon by one of our enlightened betters to indicate that this little boy might be better off as a girl.

Thus the grooming begins. Each element of the school’s sexual education program is emphasized to open a window of acceptance to the shy and lonely little Tom Boy that perhaps her problem might be she was born into the wrong body. And this is usually done without the knowledge of the parents, and often ends up with what something euphemistically referred to as “gender affirming” care and ultimately puberty blocking drugs and sometimes much worse.

Some folks are trying to do something about this and several state legislatures have considered adopting bills banning such activities for minors. One such state that did so was Alabama.

The Alabama legislature worked on the bill, gathering information, through several legislative sessions and finally passed the Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Law (VCAP) in 2022. The law bans puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery to alter the biological sex of a minor.

Two entities that supported the VCAP bill were Eagle Forum of Alabama and Southeast Law Institute. They did those things that such organizations do when supporting legislation they favor. They promoted the bill by direct communication with their own members; they issued press releases supporting the measure; they provided the legislature with pertinent information about the issues involved, including medical studies on the question, and raised funds in support of VCAP.

All that was done was typical grass-roots support for a law that the organizations support — as all-American as registering to vote.
Naturally the VCAP was a controversial piece of legislation. The left-wing Trans community opposed it, as well as numerous liberal groups and party. So, as we have seen before, someone filed suit against the state seeking to prevent the new law from taking effect, what is referred to as a pre-enforcement action.

Getting wind of the lawsuit — or perhaps because they knew and encouraged it — the Biden Administration intervened in the suit on behalf of the plaintiffs. Almost immediately the DOJ issued subpoenas to the Eagle Forum and the Southeast Law Institute for a wide range of materials that they used in their support for the passage of VCAP. The range of documents that the Biden Administration demanded was so far reaching that Heritage Foundation expert Zack Smith of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, said:

“It is clear that subpoenas like this one are intended to harass those who are on the conservative side of policy debates in order to chill their speech, deter their active participation in the democratic legislative process, and discourage citizens from contributing to or otherwise affiliating with organizations like the Eagle Forum.

“Such abusive discovery threatens the First Amendment rights of membership organizations to engage in free speech, associate with others who share their beliefs, and speak to their elected representatives and other government officials about public policy issues that concern them.”

This is how the judge described the subpoena in his order quashing it.

“The subpoenas, which generally seek to probe whether the nonparties [Eagle Forum and Southeast Law] helped research and draft the Act, commanded the nonparties to produce eleven categories of evidence: (1) draft and proposed legislation; (2) materials the nonparties considered when preparing such legislation; (3) documents concerning the nonparties’ policy goals; (4) documents provided to the Alabama Legislature; (5) communications with the Alabama Legislature; (6) communications with nongovernmental organizations; (7) records and minutes of meetings; (8) polling and public opinion data; (9) documents related to presentations, videos, interviews, and speeches given by the nonparties’ representatives; (10) mass letters, newsletters, and emails; and (11) social media postings.”

The misuse of the government’s subpoena power was so blatant that during a preliminary hearing to schedule a hearing on the motion to quash, U.S. District Court Judge Liles C. Burke seemed to scold the Justice Department, prefiguring his ultimate ruling on the motion:

“Administrations change every four years, or at least every eight. Is the new standard going to be that these kind of subpoenas go out in legislation to any advocacy organization, and they want emails to their members, they want social media posts, they want things that the group just considered in their advocacy?…Is that where you think the Department of Justice thinks we need to go in this country? Because I promise you this, at some point this will be aimed at the Southern Poverty Law [Center] and the ACLU, and their efforts, as well. Is this where we need to go?”

A close call. In the end, however, it is troubling that the Justice Department would attempt such a stunt, for as Eagle Forum’s attorney Margaret Green wrote to her board before the decision, “If this subpoena is enforced it will have an unprecedented chilling effect on historically protected Constitutional rights and legislative advocacy in Alabama and possibly around America.”

Unfortunately, an un-principled administration, seeking to win at all costs, was willing to trample the rights of private citizens banding together to better their state. This is what we have come to expect from those who are charged with defending the Constitution. Our problem is that unless Congress is willing to step forward we will be subjected to more close calls as this was, until ultimately the unbridled forces of a renegade regime will win and neuter our constitutional system.

Consider this with other recent actions against — not criminal cartels or foreign enemies, but peaceful citizens going about their lives seeking only to influence their political representatives. Take the wrong side and this could be you.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday on Faith On Trial at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

Michigan AG Nessel’s War On Catholics

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue 

Why is Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continuing her harassment of the Catholic Church? That is what her latest investigation of clergy sexual abuse amounts to, hunting for guilty priests going back over 70 years ago in the Diocese of Marquette. The record shows that this is not an anomaly.

Nessel’s animus against Catholics is palpable and well documented.  

She wasn’t in office for two months before she put Catholics on notice: if they were asked by law enforcement about clergy sexual abuse, they should “ask to see their badge, not their rosary.” She couldn’t wait to get the Catholic Church and intimidate Catholics.

Even before Nessel took office on January 1, 2019, she started her war on Catholics. She flat out said she would not enforce a religious liberty bill that protected the religious freedom of faith-based foster care and adoption services. In fact, she said those Catholics who disagreed with her were part of a “radical fringe” and were “hate mongers.”

Less than three months after she took office, Nessel made good on her anti-Catholic pledge, partnering with the ACLU of Michigan to challenge these Catholic services for children. Indeed, she said she would not defend this state law. In a settlement, she decreed that the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services must end state contracts with faith-based agencies.

Nessel got her comeuppance later in the year when a federal district court judge upheld the religious freedom of St. Vincent Catholic Charities, a  foster care and adoption agency. District court judge Robert Jonker explained in his 32-page ruling that in 2015 the Michigan legislature enacted a law upholding the right of faith-based agencies to adhere to the teachings of their Church.

Jonker wrote that Nessel’s 2018 campaign, coupled with her statements as attorney general, “create a strong inference that the State’s real target is the religious beliefs and confessions of St. Vincent, and not discriminatory conduct.”

Moreover, the judge said, she sought to terminate the state’s contract “simply because St. Vincent adheres to its sincerely held religious belief that marriage is an institution created by God to join a single man to a single woman.” Furthermore, this “strongly suggests that the State’s real goal is not to promote non-discriminatory child placements, but to stamp out St. Vincent’s religious belief” and replace it “with a State-orthodoxy test that prevents Catholic believers from participating.”

“All of this,” he concluded, “supports a strong inference that St. Vincent was targeted based on its religious belief, and that it was Defendant Nessel who targeted it.”

The judge said Nessel’s policy—which would “flout the letter and stated intention of the Michigan legislature”—“actually undermines the state’s stated goal of preventing discriminatory conduct and maximizing available placements for children.”

“Shuttering St. Vincent would create significant disruption for the children in its care, who already face an unpredictable home life and benefit from stability,” Jonker said. “It would also hurt the foster and adoptive parents who rely on St. Vincent for support and would have to find new resources.”

It is not just this judge, and the Catholic League, that have noted Nessel’s anti-Catholic bigotry. She no sooner took office when Michigan State Rep. Beau LaFave went after her for retweeting a statement citing the hiring of a retired judge by Michigan State University to address sexual abuse. The tweet in question noted his ties to the Catholic Church.  LaFave further noted Nessel’s previous comments attacking Catholicism.

Nessel’s latest attack on the Catholic Church—her vacuous report on the Diocese of Marquette—is a reflection of who she is.

There is no room for bigots in public life.