Posted on 05/03/2008 6:58:15 PM PDT by Alex Murphy
Bill Donohue may not be tired of the culture wars–or internecine Catholic wars. The head of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is often over the top in denunciations of anti-Catholicism, real or perceived, and of other Catholics who Donohue sees as not toeing the proper Catholic line. But even Donohue may have outdone himself, and done in his own organization, if his latest press release prompts an IRS investigation.
The May 2 release is “Catholic Dissidents Advise Obama,” and it draws down on Obama’s Catholic National Advisory Committee, which includes several Commonwealers, such as Cathleen Kaveny and Grant Gallicho. It also includes Catholics in public and religious life, ranging from Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania to the Sister of St. Joseph, Sr. Catherine Pinkerton. Also included are more than a few writers and theologians whose work I have long admired. Point of disclosure: I have also known Bill Donohue for years, and while I think he is completely wrongheaded many times, and inimical to the church’s well-being other times, he can also be a good guy to have a beer with, as well as someone who does not run from an argument, and an advocate who can point out indisputable cases of anti-Catholicism that still persist.
That said, this latest blast is way outta line. Donohue not only labels these Obama-advising Catholics as “dissidents” but he says “Practicing Catholics have every right to be insulted by Obama’s advisory group”–setting up Catholics who back Obama as bad Catholics and opponents of Obama, by implication, as good Catholics. Donohue employs his favorite trick of the invidious–and distorting–comparison, saying he wouldn’t have gay advisors who “don’t reflect the sentiment of the gay community”–as if these Obama-backers don’t reflect Catholic opinion. (In fact, they largely do. Not that this should be about public opinion, no?)
In his closing, Donohue takes a real potshot, saying that “If these are the best ‘committed Catholic leaders, scholars and advocates’ Obama can find, then it is evident that he has a ‘Wright’ problem when it comes to picking Catholic advisors.” As if these Catholics–check out the list–are the equivalent of Jeremiah Wright…!
But let me dissect this a bit more analytically. I see four chief problems.
One is that Donohue bases his criticism of these dozens of advisors principally on the “scores” that the abortion rights group NARAL gives some of the political figures on the committee (conveniently not mentioning the presence of Democrats Bob Casey and Tim Roemer, also on Obama’s committee, who have taken stands against abortion rights in many cases). Donohue also states that Obama’s pol pals do not agree with the church’s “three major public policy issues: abortion, embryonic stem cell research and school vouchers.” That is a rather selective list, in that the bishops’ own statement on political participation, titled “Faithful Citizenship,” lists seven principal policy areas, and they include “Option for the Poor and Vulnerable,” “Dignity of Work and the Rights of Workers,” and “Caring for God’s Creation.” Not to mention the church’s opposition to the Iraq War, which John McCain wants to continue.
Indeed, while Donohue has criticized McCain’s alliance with the rock-ribbed televangelist and preacher of standard anti-Catholic rhetoric, John Hagee, he has not brought similar scrutiny to McCain’s own Catholic advisory board.
And that raises the second problem, which was noted by the liberal group, Catholics United, namely that Donohue’s apparent partisanship could jeopardize the League’s 501c3 non-profit status. Catholics United also cites passages from “Onward Christian Solders,” a new book by Deal Hudson–a longtime GOP advisor–that show how Donohue has been active in helping the Bush White House and the Republican Party woo the Catholic vote.
This adds up to a big potential problem for Donohue. Yet it also adds up to a big payday for him. As the League’s publicly-available financial forms show, Donohue takes in a whopping $343,000 a year in salary and compensation. He can rightly claim that he has turned the League from a penny-ante mom-and-pop shop into the $20-million-dollar a year culture war machine that it is. But while few would disagree with fighting anti-Catholicism, I wonder how many will see Donohue as getting rich off anti-Catholicism.
A final point: Pope Benedict XVI, who Donohue spares no effort to defend, even when the pontiff is not under attack, made an explicit call during last month’s visit for Catholics to seek unity, not division. I’m not sure how Donohue’s internecine and potentially partisan sniping achieves that end, or even how attacking other Catholics connects with fighting anti-Catholicism.
LOLOL! That's right kiddos, this one's all mine!
My apologies. I posted before seeing the offending post removed.
I welcome your removal of my post that quoted the disgusting post.
Thanks,
sitetest
Boy, you’re quick.
You’re the Smooth Moderator, baby.
I find the assertions in the post to be wholesale balderdash.
My post got zapped on my Dad’s computer but to summarize . . .
The RM, if anything, to keep sane and avoid A SUPER EXCESS
of RC whining; wailing, throwing dust in the air and RC abuse-button-sitting marathons,
probably looks the other way over 80% of the RC posters’ offenses of
1. PERSONAL ASSAULTS
2. Other offenses they wail about Prottys over but liberally get away with themselves.
I don’t per se fault the RM for doing so. I think it’s the only way he can stay sane and functionally do his job given the givens.
The RC’s seem to think nothing of bothering Daddy JimRob over their petty thin-skinned sensibilities at the drop of a hat. Yet, they do the same sort of thing they whine so much about in quadruplicate usually with marked impunity.
Yet they have the unmitigated gall to claim things are biased AGAINST THEM????
What wholesale balderdash.
BTW, I’m 100% confident that a panel of unbiased atheistic communications professors could document such RC favored stuff on any number of religion forum threads quite easily.
We prottys have to endure
hostile, trolling, outrageously titled and stated RC posts and threads virtually 24/7.
You don’t hear us whining anything remotely close to the RC whines.
More noise from the UFO crowd. Yawn.
Predators never whine.
I’m responding to a post about how the Prottys are treated more kindly than the RC’s . . . which I find horrifically the opposite of ‘objective reality.’
I would guesstimate that the RC stuff that goes unslapped compared to the Protty stuff that goes unslapped to be roughly
65%-75% of RC violations go unslapped compared to
15% of Protty violations go unslapped.
I think it would be easy to find 20 threads where that was objectively quantifiable.
And insults against the Church is making it personal to a Catholic
- - - -
Now the RC’s don’t want just a special dictionary for themselves, they want to insist that their special dictionary be the only one for all of FR.
How quaint.
Welllllllllllll, whoop T doo
All the Prottys could decide the same thing.
How sweet would that silliness be!
Who you callin’ boy?
Seems to me that Prottys ought to have some input into such a process.
And, away from home, I have no ping list.
My guess is that the Prottys feel there is no hope of having lasting influence in such a process so they are just not bothering.
Prottys could say the same thing about several RC’s.
Hogwash.
Hogwash.
with spamming and trolling not accepted.
ALL SUCH ARE IN THE EYES OF THE BEHOLDER. . . .
And RC’s have long demanded and too often gotten wholesale
favoritism on such scores.
Even from the fairest and most evanhanded of RM’s.
Otherwise, the RM (& too often JimRob) would have not a moment’s peace from the compulsively whining RC’s.
Anti-Catholic Fetishists of the World, UNITE!
Is this the time on the thread when you tweak Catholics with a 2x4?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.