An atheist organization is accusing the County of Lackawanna Transit System of violating its free-speech rights by rejecting an advertisement it wanted to place on the side of COLTS buses.

COLTS officials said Wednesday the ad proposed by the NEPA Freethought Society runs counter to the agency's policy against allowing its property to become a forum for the debate of public issues.

The society, described on its website as a "social, educational, activist and philosophical coalition of non-believers," approached COLTS in late January about advertising on at least 10 buses, member and spokesman Justin Vacula said.

The proposed ad - with the word "Atheists" along with the names and websites of the society and a second organization, American Atheists, in white print on a blue background - was intended to be content-free and "the most inoffensive message possible," Mr. Vacula said.

In mid-February, he said, the transit agency notified him the ad had been rejected because it was "controversial and would spark public debate ... in violation of COLTS' advertising policy."

He said COLTS has previously accepted ads promoting adoption as an alternative to abortion, as well as ads for a blog with links to "Holocaust-denial websites."

"We are saying this is discrimination because they are picking and choosing the content of their messages," said Mr. Vacula, 23, of Scranton. "Since they are a government entity, they should not be permitted to do that.

"If they offer ad space, they should offer ad space to everyone equally. I see this as a free-speech issue and a violation of the First Amendment."

COLTS solicitor Joseph DeNaples said the ad did not conform to the policy the COLTS board adopted June 21 for the sale of advertising on its vehicles, route schedules, shelters and other property.

Under the policy, COLTS lists seven areas in which it does not accept advertising, including ads "that are objectionable, controversial or would generally be offensive to COLTS' ridership" as determined by the agency.

Mr. DeNaples said NEPA Freethought Society's ad was rejected on the basis of another, broader provision in the policy. "Finally, it is COLTS' desired intent not to allow its transit vehicles or property to become a public forum for dissemination, debate or discussion of public issues," the provision says.

Based on Mr. Vacula's stated intention to "test" the advertising policy, along with other statements on his and the society's websites, COLTS concluded the purpose of the ad was to promote debate and turned it down, Mr. DeNaples said.

"It's clear to us his intent is to spur some type of debate about religious views or non-religious views, and it's not our position to advance or promote or prohibit it," he said.

COLTS spokeswoman Gretchen Wintermantel said she was not certain when the adoption ad referenced by Mr. Vacula appeared on buses, although it was "definitely before our policy was adopted." Neither she nor Executive Director Robert Fiume was familiar with the ad for the blog.

"If we have to remove that, we will," Mr. Fiume said.

Mary Catherine Roper, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, said the question is whether COLTS accepts ads "from other people except for atheists."

"That would be a problem," she said.

In a case pursued by the ACLU and the Pittsburgh League of Young Voters Education Fund, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in August that the Port Authority of Allegheny County violated the groups' free-speech rights by refusing to display a voter-education ad on its buses in 2006. The court, in affirming a lower court decision, held the port authority's refusal was based on the ad's viewpoint.

If COLTS turned down NEPA Freethought Society's ad because it might be controversial, that is "just not acceptable," Ms. Roper said.

"The one absolute rule is you cannot reject something because it is controversial," Ms. Roper said. "There are very few things that are always a violation of the First Amendment, but that is one of them."

Mr. DeNaples said the potentially controversial nature of the ad was not a factor.

"No, not at all," he said. "If you look at the ad policy, we choose not to promote advertising that would further, for instance, the sale of tobacco products. We don't allow political candidate ads on our buses. ... There are a host of issues we have decided as an authority that we wouldn't promote by running ads."

American Atheists, the other organization that would be mentioned in the proposed ad, also chimed in.

In a letter to COLTS, the group's Pennsylvania state director, Ernest Perce V, called the agency's position illegal and discriminatory, and asked it to reconsider its rejection of the ad.

"All the people of Lackawanna County are granted equal protection and privilege by the U.S. and Pennsylvania Constitutions, both of which also mandate government refrain from endorsing religion. ... The government does not have the right to deny free speech in or on a public forum," Mr. Perce wrote.

Contact the writer: dsingleton@timesshamrock.com