Uncategorized

Christian Warrior D. James Kennedy Dies

September 5, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – Dr. D. James Kennedy, an internationally renowned Presbyterian minister, religious broadcaster, and Christian warrior, passed away early Wednesday morning. He was 76.

Longtime pastor of the Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Kennedy preached his last sermon on Christmas Eve 2006. Four days later, he suffered a cardiac arrest and had been unable to return to the pulpit since. On August 26, 2007, Coral Ridge Ministries announced Kennedy’s retirement as senior pastor.

After arriving at the modest mission church of 45 people known as Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in 1959, Dr. Kennedy transformed it into 10,000-member Christian epicenter, with services broadcast to three million Americans and 200 nations. In addition, his commitment to cultural renewal and evangelism led Dr. Kennedy to found several organizations focused on training Christians to carry the Gospel into all parts of society.

“Dr. Kennedy was a true Christian leader for our time, and we are grateful for his example, wisdom, and uncompromising commitment to spreading the Kingdom of God. He was an outspoken foe of the ACLU and activist judges who were de-Christianizing our nation. He will be missed,” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life through education, litigation, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Law Center Seeks Supreme Court Review of Case Defending Michigan’s Legal Birth Definition Act

September 4, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI —The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to review a case that seeks to establish the right of a State to define the moment when a human being is born and therefore a person under the law. This law, known as the Michigan Legal Birth Definition Act, was proposed by initiative petition and drew the support of nearly 460,000 Michigan citizens. The Act is an alternative approach to banning the grisly partial-birth abortion procedure, and it reaffirms the right of a State to defend human life.

Robert Muise, the Law Center attorney handling the matter, commented, “Not content with doing their killing inside the womb, abortionists want the right to kill a child that is in the process of being born. However, States have the right to draw a line between abortion and infanticide. The Legal Birth Definition Act defines the point at which a child is a person under the law and therefore entitled to rights, including the most basic right to life.”

The ACLU, Planned Parenthood and others filed a federal lawsuit against the Act, claiming that the law violates a woman’s right to abortion. The Act was struck down by a federal judge in Michigan, and that decision was upheld by the federal Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Ohio. In its petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Law Center is representing Standing Together To Oppose Partial-birth-abortion (“STTOP”), the ballot question committee formed by Michigan Right to Life, which played a crucial role in enacting this citizen-initiated legislation.

In October 2003, pro-abortion Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm vetoed a bill passed by the Legislature to ban partial-birth abortion. In response, the citizens of Michigan, through the efforts of STTOP, gathered nearly 460,000 signatures, 200,000 more than needed to adopt the legislation without the governor’s approval. The Legal Birth Definition Act was subsequently passed by a simple majority vote in both the Michigan House and Senate. STTOP’s petition drive was one of the most successful petition drives in recent Michigan history.

On March 1, 2005, the ACLU and other abortion proponents filed a lawsuit in federal court in Detroit, Michigan, against the Michigan Attorney General and others, seeking to overturn the will of the people of Michigan, claiming that the Legal Birth Definition Act violates their right to have and perform abortions. The Law Center sought to intervene in the federal case on behalf of STTOP, arguing that STTOP has a substantial interest in upholding the constitutionality of this law and further noting that STTOP represents the voice of the citizens of Michigan who have a substantial interest in the protection and preservation of human life.

In September 2005, Clinton-appointed, federal judge, Denise Page Hood, denied the Law Center’s request to intervene on behalf of STTOP and declared the Act unconstitutional, claiming, in part, that it placed “an undue burden on the woman’s right to reproductive choice” by banning “safe” abortion procedures. Both STTOP and the Attorney General appealed the judge’s ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which recently affirmed.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “The constitutional right to abortion is an abhorrent mark on our nation affixed by the courts. The intentional killing of innocent babies will never be acceptable to us, and we will do everything we can to stop it.”

Complaint Filed on Behalf of Firefighters Forced to Participate in San Diego’s “Gay Pride” Parade

August 28, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that its West Coast Director, San Diego area attorney, Charles LiMandri, filed a sexual harassment and freedom of speech complaint in California state court on behalf of four respected San Diego firefighters. Charles LiMandri was also the Thomas More Law Center’s lead counsel in the successful Mt. Soledad Cross case in San Diego.

In July, four San Diego firefighters were ordered, against their wishes, to participate in uniform on their city fire engine in San Diego’s annual “Gay Pride” parade. During the course of the ensuing three hour long ordeal, the firefighters were subjected to vile sexual taunts and gestures along the parade route. These firemen are devoted husbands and fathers. All four firemen are Christian and two are Catholic.

Charles LiMandri explains filing the complaint in state court, “These men were sexually harassed in clear violation of San Diego’s sexual harassment code. Further, the California Constitution’s freedom of speech provision prohibits compelled speech. What the firefighters were ordered to do was endorse what goes on at this parade through their participation in it.”

Brian Rooney, spokesman for the Thomas More Law Center stated, “In one regard, forcing these firefighters to participate in this parade has removed the artificial veneer of legitimacy from this event to expose it for what it truly is—a temporary suspension of decency laws in the name of inclusion and diversity. The debauched and decadent conduct at this parade clearly violates municipal codes that prohibit public nudity and obscenity. The City has played make believe long enough.”

Thompson further added, “There is a transvestite group dressed up as nuns that marches in this parade every year in crude mockery of the Catholic faith. No other religion would be treated this way. And for the City of San Diego to sponsor such an event and for its political leaders to endorse such behavior by their presence is outrageous. Two of the firefighters who are Catholic were forced to endorse such mockery of their faith by being forced to participate in the parade.”

The so-called “gay pride” parade took place on July 21, 2007 in San Diego. On July 20, 2007, the four firefighters in question were told by their superiors that they would be participating in the parade. All four repeatedly protested that they did not wish to participate. On the morning of July 21, 2007, however, these same four firefighters were ordered to ride on a fire engine, in uniform, in the parade.

LiMandri commented, “Our complaint will show that this is not the first time that firefighters were ordered into this parade against their will and complained to the fire department. One of the main reasons for this complaint is so that no firefighter will again be forced to participate in a parade that is so sexually charged that it creates a hostile work environment. The City should be concentrating the fire department’s efforts on working the parade and responding to emergencies, not putting these brave firefighters on parade to be sexually harassed.” LiMandri went on to say, “We want a new policy for the Fire Department that will explicitly state that no firefighter will be ordered in the future into this type of parade again against his or her will.”

NYC’s Khalil Gibran Intl Academy an Incubator for Islamist Radicalization – TMLC Enters Fray

August 27, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – Claiming it is nothing more than a thinly disguised incubator for Islamist radicalization, the Thomas More Law Center, a national Christian public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that it will represent a group of citizens opposed to the September 4 opening of the publicly funded Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA) by the New York City Department of Education. KGIA, which will immerse its students in Islamic culture, has three fundamentalist Islamist imams on its Board of Advisors, as well as other promoters with connections to militant Islamic organizations.

“This proposed public school is nothing more than an incubator for the radicalization that leads to terrorism, as a NYPD Intelligence Report warned Americans just about two weeks ago,” cautioned Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center. “Rather than use the public school system to assimilate Muslims and other immigrants into American culture, New York City is doing everything it can to keep them isolated – a target rich environment for recruiting potential new homegrown terrorists and a recipe for a future 911 disaster, according to my read of the NYPD Report,” said Thompson.

Continued Thompson, “As uncomfortable as it makes one feel, we must understand that the political goal of radical Islam is to destroy our Judeo-Christian culture. And the KGIA is a Trojan Horse New York City is building for radical Islam with taxpayer money. That the Quran calls for Muslims to subjugate the world, especially Christians and Jews, is a fact that anyone can look up.”

Thompson further added, “New York City School Chancellor, Joel Klein, who is aggressively promoting this Islamic school, is the same person who refused to allow two Christian students, a second and a fourth grader, to display a nativity scene during Christmas—another example of how political correctness is leading to a malicious double standard when it comes to religious expression in public schools.”

The Law Center will act as co-counsel with attorney David Yerushalmi, who filed a Freedom of Information Act request on July 23, 2007 asking for more specific details about KGIA. Thus far, his requests have gone unanswered, leading to increased suspicion that the school as currently configured cannot meet state educational standards. Moreover, several factors, including an executive summary of the KGIA proposal, point to the school as an anti-American, anti-Christian, and anti-Jewish propaganda center paid for by American tax dollars.

Some of the school’s promoters have ties to questionable Islamic organizations including CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations), an un-indicted co-conspirator in cases dealing with the funding of terror, whose founder and chairman publicly stated in 1998:

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant.
The Quaran should be the highest authority in America,
and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”

On KGIA’s Advisory Board is Imam Talib Abdul-Rashid, the resident imam of the Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood. The “About Us” page of the Mosque of the Islamic Brotherhood website contains the ominous slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood:

The Qu’ran is our constitution
Jihad is our way
And death in the way of Allah is our promised end.

The Executive Summary of the new school has a section entitled “A Day in the Life of a Student at the Khalil Gibran International Academy,” which describes how imaginary students pass through a hallway adorned with portraits of Arab philosophers, inventors, poets, musicians. Notably, there is no mention of portraits of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, or our other Founding Fathers.

In another section of the Executive Summary, “Fatin” (an imaginary student), heads over to the cafeteria for lunch where retired Arabic speaking community members come daily to converse with students to strengthen their Arabic fluency. “I wonder what they will be talking about?” commented Thompson. “Will it be about Al Queda or Hamas, the Palestinian issue, Muslim versus Jew, Muslim versus Christian, anti-American diatribe, who knows?”

Recently adding to the controversy was the resignation of KGIA principal-designate, Dhabah Almontaser, after she defended T-Shirts supporting a “NYC Intifada.” Compounding suspicions of KGIA’s Islamic agenda, the strategy meeting to protest the media’s criticism of Almontaser was held at the Islamic Society of Bay Ridge that has a long history of serving as a center of radical jihadist activity.

Thompson added, “We cannot ignore the fact that according to a 2005 report released by the Center for Religious Freedom, mosques throughout America are depositories for venomous anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish propaganda disseminated by the Saudi government.”

Publicly funded Islamic schools are popping up in several communities across the country where public school officials who routinely ban religious expressions by Christian students as unconstitutional, are energetically establishing these Islamic schools under the guise of promoting multiculturism and diversity.

Several public universities have already constructed footbaths to facilitate Muslim prayer rituals.

Anyone negotiating with Muslims should be aware of the Islamic principle of taquiya, or the approval of lying to infidels in order to advance the cause of Islam. That principle has been used by Muslims to adopt a peaceful attitude to deceive their non-Muslim neighbors until they gain the strength to subjugate them.

Chancellor Klein has attempted to assuage citizen fears that KGIA is a madrassa by promising to monitor the school for any religious violations. However, once the school is operational, any attempt to monitor for religious expressions, besides the practical difficulties, may well be challenged as a constitutional violation in itself as such monitoring for religious material is arguably an excessive entanglement with religion.

In 2002, the Thomas More Law Center filed a federal lawsuit against California’s Byron Union School District because of its three week intensive course to teach seventh graders how to become Muslims. During the course, students took on Muslim names which they printed on name tags worn during class, were taught the five duties all Muslims must perform, were required to complete a project for each duty, and memorized verses and prayers from the Quaran. They even played a game entitled Jihad.

More recently, the Law Center’s public criticism of California’s Carver Elementary School for designating a special time and room so that the Muslim students could pray during school hours contributed to a change in that school’s policy.

MI Gov. Removes Stem Cell Research Petition From Website After Thomas More Law Center Lawsuit

August 20, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – Michigan Governor Jenifer Granholm’s office confirmed that it has removed their petition supporting embryonic stem cell research from the Governor’s publicly funded website. The Governor’s action came less than a week after the Thomas More Law Center filed a federal lawsuit asking the court to either ban the petition or allow pro-life groups to place their own petition supporting the ban on embryonic stem cell research on the website as well.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “The battle is not yet over. She has not yet answered our lawsuit. It’s important to keep in mind that the website in question is paid for and owned by the people of this State; it is not Governor Granholm’s personal property. Yet, she only allowed people who supported her position to use the website to petition the leaders of the legislature — a clear case of discrimination against citizens who are pro-life.”

On July 6, 2007, Thompson sent a letter to the Governor asking that she immediately revise the portion of the website addressing restrictions on stem cell research to include an enclosed petition so that citizens who disagreed with her position could have the same opportunity to have their views communicated to the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House when she communicated the views of those who agreed with her.

The Governor’s office did not respond to the letter or to a phone call from one the Law Center’s attorneys.

Law Center spokesperson, Mallary Hernly, commented, “This is a question of fundamental fairness. It is not about Governor Granholm voicing her opinion. It’s about only allowing persons who agree with her position to use a publicly funded website to communicate with their legislative representatives.”

The Thomas More Law Center filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Lansing on behalf of the Lansing Guild of the Catholic Medical Association, Flint-Area Right To Life, and Right To Life – Lifespan

While the governor’s actions are a step forward in ceasing this discriminatory practice, the lawsuit also seeks a declaration that Granholm’s policy violated the constitutional rights of those citizens who were denied equal access to, and use of, the website. Further, it has yet to be shown whether this is a principled end to the discrimination or simply an attempt to put the lawsuit to rest.

MI Gov. Sued For Discrimination Against Citizens Who Oppose Embryonic Stem Cell Research

August 9, 2007 by

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, announced today that it has filed a federal lawsuit against Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm for discrimination against citizens who oppose embryonic stem research. The Governor currently allows private citizens to use the Office of the Governor website to submit a petition posted on the website addressed to Michigan’s legislature leaders to lift Michigan’s legal restrictions on stem cell research.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of three pro-life organizations, the Lansing Guild of the Catholic Medical Association, Flint-Area Right To Life, and Right To Life – Lifespan, after the governor refused their request to place a petition to the legislative leaders on the Governor’s official publicly funded website, opposing efforts to lift the ban on embryonic stem cell research.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “Governor Granholm’s decision to use public funds to discriminate against citizens who disagree with her on the issue of stem cell research violates our clients’ constitutional rights of speech, association, equal protection, and petitioning. Her support of embryonic stem cell research demonstrates a callous disregard for human life.”

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Lansing, seeks a declaration that Granholm’s policy violates the constitutional rights of those citizens who were denied equal access to, and use of, the website, as well as injunctive relief ordering Granholm to cease discriminating against citizens based on their views about legal restrictions on embryonic stem cell research in Michigan.

Patrick T. Gillen, the Law Center attorney handling the case, observed that “Granholm’s use of government resources to favor citizens who agree with her views on public policy violates First Amendment and equal protection rights. It is a dangerous precedent which, if unchallenged, would enable public officials to drown out the voice of dissenters.”