While I am not a fan of Donahue’s style, this case aside, his work in defense of the faith is laudable. I can only assume that your libelous attributions to him (i.e. suggesting that he would scream about “queers or Hollywood Jews” reflects your ignorance of his work and character. If it not be ignorance then it must be disingenuity. In either case, it is hard to escape the impression of malice on your part.

Donahue is justified in his outrage over the denigration that Hollywood and the media regularly foists upon Catholics. Failure to understand his reaction in this case would seem to reflect either a lack of understanding of the meaning of the Sacrament of Holy Orders or a lack of belief in its truth; to demean a priest who is sacramentally/ontologically configured to Christ is to demean Christ Himself. To lack this understanding or belief necessarily removes one from the qualifications to judge Donahue’s response as a Catholic.

In the end, a knowledgeable and faithful Catholic will indeed be angered over this continued assault on his faith, indeed on Christ Himself. He will understand and share Donahue’s concern though he may disagree with his methods of carrying out his duty, as ever Catholic has, to defend his faith.

Should we be outraged–Yes! If she mocked Islam–she would be dead by now! But, they go for the “safe” Christians.

I think it inadvisable, Todd, to use the first person plural when what you really want to say is “me” not “us”…as in “I’d hope that he’d save me from further embarrassment.

Todd, I am not embarrassed by an ocaasional gaffe from William Donahue. We all owe him a great debt of gratitude, whereas in your case….

Sometimes it’s best to say nothing. In BS’s case, she’ll go away in fifteen minutes. And in Donohue’s case, I’d hope he’d save us from further embarassment.

She was “guided” into that decision by far more evil people than she ever will be–the genuine Church-haters in Hollywood and/or NYC.