http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=123134A "bizarre" ruling by a judge in Maine who declined to address a dispute over a fine announced by the state against a Christian organization for criticizing Islam will be appealed, attorneys have confirmed.
"The judge has a bizarre order that suggests that after you file a lawsuit when the state wants to have you reapply for the fundraising license, that makes the issue a state question," said Mathew Staver, chief counsel for the non-profit Liberty Counsel.
The case was brought on behalf of the Christian Action Network, which argued it was in good standing with a valid license for prior years in Maine, authorizing the group to mail letters in the state. Then it filed to renew its license last March, and the check for the annual license was deposited by the state.
CAN later mailed a letter "exposing how some public schools were promoting Islam by providing instruction on the Five Pillars of Islam and the Quran. The letter pointed out that some schools have provided a 'prayer room' for Muslims and one textbook ... told seventh grade students they 'will become Muslim,'" the report said.
The letter listed Gov. John Baldacci as a person over public schools to whom citizens should voice their opinion.
Then in May, the organization was told its application was denied, and it was being fined $4,000 because the state alleged CAN's letter had "an inflammatory anti-Muslim message," the letter "used" Baldacci's name and the registration was "incomplete."
First District Court Judge David Hornby now has rejected the organization's federal complaint which asked for the license to be reinstated and that the state law be overturned since a "permissions" requirement to refer to state officials would violate the First Amendment.
Christian Action Network President Martin Mawyer said the fundraising letter was a general letter encouraging recipients to ask their governors to prevent their state's public schools from teaching Islam as a religious experience.
It was designed so that state-specific content could be adjusted so the letter could be sent to supporters in all 50 states, he said.
Mawyer said the letter's use of Baldacci's name is the reason the state revoked CAN's fundraising license. The CAN president added that the state of Maine claims the fundraising letter was a case of fraud.
"The state had to claim the letter was fraudulent because the law only allows them to monitor fraud. Since they knew the letter was an expression of free speech and that it was protected, they had to claim that the whole letter was fraudulent," Mawyer said.
CAN's corporate attorney David Carroll said the problem with Maine's law is that it is based on multiculturalism.
"The real problem here is that the educational establishment has a tin ear when it comes to things that are offensive to Christians but sensitive to things that are offensive to any other religion," Carroll said.
"The education system is left-leaning and the left in general has a tin ear to when it comes to things that are offensive to Christians. The other thing is that maybe because Christianity was the dominant religion so the left thinks it's OK to offend Christians," Carroll added.
"The left believes that all fundamentalism is dangerous," Carroll said.
Hornby's decision said the CAN suit is about a state question.
Staver said an appeal to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is being pursued:
Listen to the interview:
Staver added that the federal judge also ruled CAN should go through the state's administrative process to get its license back.
"The state statute says that a person can't use another person's name in a fundraising letter without first getting that person's permission. This makes no sense," Staver said.
"If you're mentioning the governor or any other official, and asking people to contact that individual, or question something about that individual in which you're doing any fundraising, you have to get that official's permission. That essentially takes away your right to petition the government because no official is going to give their permission," Staver said.
"We’re appealing the ruling because we believe the district judge's decision will be overturned. The fact of the matter is that we're actually challenging the statute and say the statute itself is unconstitutional. That's always a federal question," Staver said.
Topic: 'Bizarre' decision against Islam critique appealed (Read 3466 times)