A student of uncommon courage

[Guest Guest]

Why would it shock them? They participted in many universal rituals.  They united the nation under one flag among other things.  Something you consider just an arbitrary symbol. 

Whom do you refer to as us?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Adopting a flag isn't a daily ritual, or even an occasional ritual. Your argument makes no sense.

[Guest Patriot]

Yet again you're making it up. Every nation on earth has a flag. You will not find anything I've written or anything I've said against it, because I haven't.

Having a flag is not the same thing as forcing children to stand and recite words they don't understand from the time they're five until they're eighteen. The framers wouldn't be shocked by a ritual. They would be shocked that an American citizen can claim to stand for freedom, then force the ritual on someone who chooses not to participate in it. They would be shocked that you don't understand what makes a democracy work --- it's not reciting a few words. In fact, doing that just gives you cover that you've done your civic duty for the day, when in fact you haven't done a thing to help your country if that's all you've done. You don't get it. That's what they'd be shocked about.

Who are you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is a way of expressing your feelings toward

your country. If you love your country, if you're proud of being an American,

you recite the Pledge proudly. However, for Loony Left Kool-aiders like Paul

and his brain - washed son, reciting the Pledge is an infringement on their

individual "rights". Paul is truly a sickening person.

[Guest Paul]

Ask Matt if he has ever been spoken to by a principal about the need for him to sit quietly during the pledge and not do things like tap his pencil or hum out loud.

I doubt you will get a truthful answer.

And Paszkiewicz is not "my boy".  I disagree with everything he did here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have no intention of asking him anything unless you have some evidence. What you're doing, and how you're doing it is despicable.

[Guest Paul]

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is a way of expressing your feelings toward

  your country. If you love your country, if you're proud of being an American,

  you recite the Pledge  proudly.  However, for Loony Left Kool-aiders like Paul

  and his brain - washed son, reciting the Pledge is an infringement on their

  individual "rights". Paul is truly a sickening person.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is your way of expressing your feelings, and the way of many citizens. For others, it's just something they do because everyone expects it. Matthew's way is to go against the grain, stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge, and remind people that freedom isn't about those few words. It's about taking action to stand up for what the Pledge is supposed to represent. There's no risk in standing up and reciting the Pledge. Matthew took a risk. There was no reason for him to do that except that he truly cares about what freedom really means, and the way I see it, if the USA is about anything (and it's about plenty!), it's about freedom.

You don't speak for others. It's not for you to say whether Matthew loves his country, especially when you don't understand why he does what he does.

[Guest Guest]

A real American wouldn't NEED to have the Constitution shoved in their face for him or her to understand and respect it.

Fact: Matthew would have gotten zero recognition/awards/accolades had it not been for a teacher stupid enough to preach in class and dishonest enough to try and lie his way out of it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No for you, Matthew, being a real American is secret recordings and then blasting it to every bogus liberal media for the purpose of gaining the Almightly Dollar. That's what your Constitution stands for, Matthew.

[Guest Guest]

He did, all over the world. But not in Kearny. Kearny followed the Pied Piper.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Funny ! Its really because the people in this town know the truth about what really happened, not the tale that you try to weave through the threads here.

[Guest Guest]

Then you heard wrong. Remember, this would be coming from the same kids who claim Paszkiewicz wasn't preaching in class, so they're not very credible. If there was anything to say, it would have been said long ago. It's possible Matt may have been standing on occasion doing something else, just as I was on one occasion when the Pledge was recited while I was headed back to my seat. In fact I do recall him mentioning that he was in the middle of doing something one day when the pledge started, but he was never disruptive. He understands that's part of the deal, and from everything I've seen he is unfailingly respectful.

Have you people nothing better to do than try to nitpick at my son? You'd like to have a reason to criticize him, but you don't have one so you make stuff up.

He exposed your boy for what he is. He exposed the game and put a stop to it. And so you're mad. Get over it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Preaching" is your words. The tapes I heard were mutual discussions which make you a liar. It's you who keeps exposing junior here. You keep trying to boast that Matthew is meeting Miss .... or Mr. ... and expect people not to comment on it? The person who should get over it is you. But you just do not get it or I think will ever get it. There would be no reason to nitpick at it, if you didn’t keep blogging over and over and over about it. But you just cannot handle the comments back.

So if you are mad, then get over it and move on. But you can't do that, can you?

[Guest Guest]

The ADL was chosen because in the opinion of the Board and its attorney, they had the best program for delivering this information. We examined it and concurred.

A significant part of the history behind the ADL's involvement in church-state issues is that the plaintiffs who challenged school prayer in the 50s and 60s were mostly Jewish. Jewish children attending public schools were being forced into Christian prayer. They finally got sick of it, took it to the Supreme Court and won. (In fact, Matthew and I will be meeting Ellery Schempp, the plaintiff in one of the most famous cases on school prayer, in a few weeks.) Out of that history came the ADL's interest in these issues. They developed a curriculum, which is solid on the law and also the science. It was the quality of the curriculum that resulted in the choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah, that makes sense now. Thanks.

[Guest Guest]

I have no intention of asking him anything unless you have some evidence. What you're doing, and how you're doing it is despicable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In other words, you asked and didn't like the answer matt gave you.

[Guest Paul]

"Preaching" is your words. The tapes I heard were mutual discussions which make you a liar.  It's you who keeps exposing junior here.  You keep trying to boast that Matthew is meeting Miss .... or Mr. ...  and expect people not to comment on it?  The person who should get over it is you.  But you just do not get it or I think will ever get it.  There would be no reason to nitpick at it, if you didn’t keep blogging over and over and over about it.  But you just cannot handle the comments back.

So if you are mad, then get over it and move on. But you can't do that, can you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you're exposing are your biases, which are obviously overwhelming to your reason. This was clearly a topic the teacher was eager to discuss, which he may not discuss. Paszkiewicz monopolized the discussions and forced them where he wanted them to go. When I analyzed the recordings, I found that he commanded 70% of the talking time. He cut students off in mid-sentence to promote his views, which he stated as fact. That is horrid pedagogy, not to mention the fact that he had no business opining on these subjects in the first place. That's why he got into trouble. Competent adult teachers let the students discuss those things, but not this guy, and why: because he wanted to preach his religion. He said that was his mission, and he did it.

Matthew did not initiate any of the subjects; I listened to the recordings very carefully specifically on that point. It wouldn't matter, though, because even if Matthew had initiated the entire discussion, the teacher is still not allowed to promote his religious views, even if the students had begged him. That is the meaning and import of the policy the Kearny Board of Education passed in the spring.

And I did not come up with the label "preacher-teacher." That was given to Paszkiewicz by mainstream local press, and by people all over the world.

There's no reason for either of us to nitpick at it, and as I've said before I'd like to end this, but you're not going to be allowed to re-invent history. You radical righties do it all the time, you're conditioned to do it, and most people let you do it because they give up trying to have any reasonable discussion with you, seeing that your biases render you incapable of rational discourse. In the fantasy world you obviously live in, if you say it often enough it becomes true. I would sooner discuss more productive subjects with people who are more reasonable than you are, but as long as you keep trying to change the facts and it's about my son, I'm going to keep correcting you. If that makes me sick and twisted, then that would be my problem, not yours.

[Guest Guest]

I have no intention of asking him anything unless you have some evidence. What you're doing, and how you're doing it is despicable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing despicable about it. You were the one who brought up the subject.

But the fact remains that there's nothing unruly about sitting quietly while others participate in a ritual.

Your implication is that Matthew has always sat quietly while the pledge was recited in school. It is not true.

[Guest Guest]

I have no intention of asking him anything unless you have some evidence. What you're doing, and how you're doing it is despicable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now you're speaking volumes.

[Guest Guest]

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is your way of expressing your feelings, and the way of many citizens. For others, it's just something they do because everyone expects it. Matthew's way is to go against the grain, stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge, and remind people that freedom isn't about those few words. It's about taking action to stand up for what the Pledge is supposed to represent. There's no risk in standing up and reciting the Pledge. Matthew took a risk. There was no reason for him to do that except that he truly cares about what freedom really means, and the way I see it, if the USA is about anything (and it's about plenty!), it's about freedom.

You don't speak for others. It's not for you to say whether Matthew loves his country, especially when you don't understand why he does what he does.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Therefore according to your sick logic, if I feel like expressing my feeling toward Matthew, and because I sometimes like going against the grain, there is nothing to prevent me from pooping on your lawn, because I don't agree what Matthew stands for? It is my risk and according to you what the Pledge is suppose to stand for, taking a risk. Afterall it is what the forefathers would have wanted.

The main risk was making those secret recordings in the first place. And not getting caught. That's what makes him a hero in your eyes, zero in the eyes of others.

[Guest Patriot]

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance is your way of expressing your feelings, and the way of many citizens. For others, it's just something they do because everyone expects it. Matthew's way is to go against the grain, stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge, and remind people that freedom isn't about those few words. It's about taking action to stand up for what the Pledge is supposed to represent. There's no risk in standing up and reciting the Pledge. Matthew took a risk. There was no reason for him to do that except that he truly cares about what freedom really means, and the way I see it, if the USA is about anything (and it's about plenty!), it's about freedom.

You don't speak for others. It's not for you to say whether Matthew loves his country, especially when you don't understand why he does what he does.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge" ??? That can only make sense

to someone who hates America.

[Matthew LaClair]

Ask Matt if he has ever been spoken to by a principal about the need for him to sit quietly during the pledge and not do things like tap his pencil or hum out loud.

I doubt you will get a truthful answer.

And Paszkiewicz is not "my boy".  I disagree with everything he did here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have never been spoken to by anyone about the need for me to sit quietly during the pledge and not do things like tap my pencil or hum out loud, and certainly not by the principal. It may have been a rumor that you heard, but I never make any noise during the pledge. If I did make disruptive noises during the pledge, then the teacher would have the right to tell me to stop. I am curious to know where you are getting this information, because it is simply not true.

[Guest Paul]

Nothing despicable about it.  You were the one who brought up the subject.

Your implication is that Matthew has always sat quietly while the pledge was recited in school.  It is not true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is true, your claim is despicable, and I am not the one who brought it up.

1. You're anonymous. We have no idea who you are, whether you were in the class where you now claim this happened, or whether you have any real information at all. We know nothing about you or where you're claiming to get this information. You hide behind your anonymity to accuse another. So it is without foundation, and that makes your parading it here despicable. Until such time as you come forward with your full name so that you can be identified, and state the basis of your claim, it's called bearing false witness. It's also called cowardice. That's why people accused are entitled to be confronted with their accusers. It's also why responsible journalists don't print accusations without identifying their sources and verifying their information.

2. You're offering this "information" nearly a year after the Paszkiewicz story broke. If it was true, it would have come out a long time ago.

3. At best, even if it was true, it's supremely petty. Tapping his fingers and humming. What are you going to accuse him of next, breathing?

When will you people stop? If you want to do something productive, get hold of the kids in town who are drinking too much or doing drugs. Or get involved to research the issue being raised about the level of taxes in town. You're after Matthew because you don't agree with him, and that's despicable too. Disagree with him, but keep your criticisms on point.

[Guest Paul]

Therefore according to your sick logic, if I feel like expressing my feeling toward Matthew, and because I sometimes like going against the grain, there is nothing to prevent me from pooping on your lawn, because I don't agree what Matthew stands for?  It is my risk and according to you what the Pledge is suppose to stand for, taking a risk.  Afterall it is what the forefathers would have wanted.

The main risk was making those secret recordings in the first place.  And not getting caught.  That's what makes him a hero in your eyes, zero in the eyes of others.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In fact, there is something to prevent you from defecating on my lawn. My lawn is my property and no, under the law you can't take a dump on it. If you care to test the proposition, try defecating on your neighbor's lawn and let us all know what happens. So I'm sorry that your argument doesn't support your point, but it makes absolutely no sense. I find it very hard be believe that you really think you can do that.

By contrast, Matthew's right to recite or not recite the Pledge is speech, and nothing more. He is entitled to sit if he so chooses. That's the law, as enunciated by no less than the US Supreme Court. When the Pledge is on, he is in class where he is supposed to be (not on your lawn), and he's not spitting on the desk or otherwise discharging liquid or solid material from his body. He is breathing, but I think that's allowed. Logic? You must be joking --- well, no, you're probably serious.

You're also wrong about why he was called a hero. Had you read any of the sites that were posted here a while back, you would know that he was called a hero (1) for putting a stop to a popular teacher's improper behavior, knowing his classmates probably would not support him, (2) for taking the heat to do it, (3) for not backing down even when the going was rough, (4) for overcoming some very stubborn resistance to accomplish his goals, and (5) because his goals were to stand up for what was right even though he encountered personal risk to do it.

You're entitled to speak for youself, but you do not speak for me, or for the many people who do think he is a hero. Yet here you are telling me what makes him a hero in my eyes. He is a hero in my eyes for reasons you don't even know about. Who are you to tell me how I feel about my son?

[Guest Paul]

"stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge" ???  That can only make sense

  to someone who hates America.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're wrong. I'll explain it to you again.

In World War II, nearly every American sacrificed for the war effort. That was real patriotism. People went without, bought war bonds, and men of suitable age signed up to fight the war.

Today, we are said to be at war, but in fact only our troops are at war. As Bill Maher put it, we're shopping. We're driving around in our gas-guzzling SUVs with yellow ribbons while our young men and women are fighting and dying in a war for oil. If you don't believe me, read Alan Greenspan's latest book --- the Republican who headed the US monetary system for decades --- he said it's a war for oil, and obviously it is.

To me, the Pledge of Allegiance is like dessert. We get to reward ourselves for our patriotism after we've demonstrated some patriotism. As a nation, we are not doing the heavy lifting that real patriotism is about. Very few of us read a decent newspaper to familiarize ourselves with political issues, our politics has become a farce, and just a little over half of us bother to vote in presidential elections (forget about "lesser" elections). We're living in a changed country. We've lost the ethic that characterized our country in World War II. JFK's ethic of asking what you can do for your country would be laughed at today, replaced by the ethic of lookin' out for me.

The Pledge tells us what good Americans we are. "Look at me, I'm a proud and patriotic American. Look at me, standing and reciting the Pledge. Aren't I wonderful!" The problem is, we're not acting like good Americans. We're not doing the heavy lifting. We're not thinking about country first. We've lost the art of citizenship. There are many fine citizens in our country, but for many, reciting the Pledge is like eating dessert without eating a decent meal first. We've gotten lazy about our citizenship, and for many people the Pledge is just another excuse for getting away with it. That's the point Matthew was making. He has told you that in a hundred ways by now. Maybe this way you'll understand it, but I doubt it.

[WilliamK]

Maybe this way you'll understand it, but I doubt it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not that Patriot et. al can't understand, but that they intend not to.

[Guest Guest]

You're wrong. I'll explain it to you again.

In World War II, nearly every American sacrificed for the war effort. That was real patriotism. People went without, bought war bonds, and men of suitable age signed up to fight the war.

Today, we are said to be at war, but in fact only our troops are at war. As Bill Maher put it, we're shopping. We're driving around in our gas-guzzling SUVs with yellow ribbons while our young men and women are fighting and dying in a war for oil. If you don't believe me, read Alan Greenspan's latest book --- the Republican who headed the US monetary system for decades --- he said it's a war for oil, and obviously it is.

To me, the Pledge of Allegiance is like dessert. We get to reward ourselves for our patriotism after we've demonstrated some patriotism. As a nation, we are not doing the heavy lifting that real patriotism is about. Very few of us read a decent newspaper to familiarize ourselves with political issues, our politics has become a farce, and just a little over half of us bother to vote in presidential elections (forget about "lesser" elections). We're living in a changed country. We've lost the ethic that characterized our country in World War II. JFK's ethic of asking what you can do for your country would be laughed at today, replaced by the ethic of lookin' out for me.

The Pledge tells us what good Americans we are. "Look at me, I'm a proud and patriotic American. Look at me, standing and reciting the Pledge. Aren't I wonderful!" The problem is, we're not acting like good Americans. We're not doing the heavy lifting. We're not thinking about country first. We've lost the art of citizenship. There are many fine citizens in our country, but for many, reciting the Pledge is like eating dessert without eating a decent meal first. We've gotten lazy about our citizenship, and for many people the Pledge is just another excuse for getting away with it. That's the point Matthew was making. He has told you that in a hundred ways by now. Maybe this way you'll understand it, but I doubt it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Matthew sitting for the pledge does even less for citizenship than reciting it does. Matthew does these things for one reason, he likes the controversy and the attention.

Speaking of the WWII era, maybe we should go back to the old adage that children should be seen and not heard.

[Guest Guest]

You're wrong. I'll explain it to you again.

In World War II, nearly every American sacrificed for the war effort. That was real patriotism. People went without, bought war bonds, and men of suitable age signed up to fight the war.

Today, we are said to be at war, but in fact only our troops are at war. As Bill Maher put it, we're shopping. We're driving around in our gas-guzzling SUVs with yellow ribbons while our young men and women are fighting and dying in a war for oil. If you don't believe me, read Alan Greenspan's latest book --- the Republican who headed the US monetary system for decades --- he said it's a war for oil, and obviously it is.

To me, the Pledge of Allegiance is like dessert. We get to reward ourselves for our patriotism after we've demonstrated some patriotism. As a nation, we are not doing the heavy lifting that real patriotism is about. Very few of us read a decent newspaper to familiarize ourselves with political issues, our politics has become a farce, and just a little over half of us bother to vote in presidential elections (forget about "lesser" elections). We're living in a changed country. We've lost the ethic that characterized our country in World War II. JFK's ethic of asking what you can do for your country would be laughed at today, replaced by the ethic of lookin' out for me.

The Pledge tells us what good Americans we are. "Look at me, I'm a proud and patriotic American. Look at me, standing and reciting the Pledge. Aren't I wonderful!" The problem is, we're not acting like good Americans. We're not doing the heavy lifting. We're not thinking about country first. We've lost the art of citizenship. There are many fine citizens in our country, but for many, reciting the Pledge is like eating dessert without eating a decent meal first. We've gotten lazy about our citizenship, and for many people the Pledge is just another excuse for getting away with it. That's the point Matthew was making. He has told you that in a hundred ways by now. Maybe this way you'll understand it, but I doubt it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In World War II, almost everyone had a direct interest in that war in that so many of them had previously come from one of those European countries in danger and many others with relatives still there. The same cannot be said today, except for the few now coming over for the Mid East. Everyone knows you are a bleeding Democrat and have tried to make this forum your political campaign, but there have been true acts of patriotism after WW II, even in the Korean and Vietnam wars and both those were also about oil as well.

And if for you, Paul LaClair, the Pledge of Allegiance is like dessert, I can only wonder what you have for dinner? There are many hard working Americans who have worked and fought for the good of this country. It is people like your son why America has lost its ethics in the eyes of the rest of the world. Ask yourself this: “What have you done for your country?” I am sure the honest answer wouldn’t surprise most of us. When I do say the Pledge of Allegiance I do it for my country. I am not trying to be a standout and sit down, or be a showoff, and if meaning that sitting down on Matthew’s lazy ass in your words makes him a better citizen, then you can take that along with your lawyer rhetoric and find some hole to crawl under. But I am not going to. So my wish for you, your son and your family that when all American people, standing as one under the American flag, symbolizing one nation, with liberty and justice for all, that those rights do not apply to you, or your son, or family. After all what would a lawyer like you know about liberty and justice?

[Strife767]

"stand up for freedom by sitting out the pledge" ???  That can only make sense

  to someone who hates America.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Way to have no damned idea what freedom means or patriotism is. "Recite this with us or you hate America!"

With an attitude like that, what can you claim you served this country (in the military) for? It wasn't to preserve our freedom, as you clearly don't want that.

Newsflash: popular speech and actions don't need protecting. The First Amendment exists to enable and protect precisely the sorts of things like not standing up and chanting with everyone else.

[Strife767]

No for you, Matthew, being a real American is secret recordings and then blasting it to every bogus liberal media for the purpose of gaining the Almightly Dollar.

1. I'm still not Matthew, idiot.

2. Not only did the LaClair family receive no money in the settlement, but the entire issue would have never even touched the media had Paszkiewicz not preached and lied about his preaching, and had the Board not sat on its hands and hoped it would all just go away despite the month plus it had to do something. It was only after all that that the LaClairs, out of frustration at the inaction, went public with the story.

3. The 'conservative media' had every opportunity to respond to the story, yet I can't seem to find any such outlet that even tried to defend Paszkiewicz. Even a group whose primary objective is to reinstate school-sanctioned prayer won't touch the story. This is obviously because even they realize that Paszkiewicz's actions are indefensible, and only the nuttiest of the nutty are even trying to make Matthew the bad guy.

That's what your Constitution stands for, Matthew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your pathetic ad hominem doesn't change reality. I know you wish it did, but it doesn't.

[Guest Paul]

Matthew sitting for the pledge does even less for citizenship than reciting it does.  Matthew does these things for one reason, he likes the controversy and the attention. 

Speaking of the WWII era, maybe we should go back to the old adage that children should be seen and not heard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You don't know his motives. He knows his motives, and from everything I can see they are exactly what he says they are. Everything he has done is consistent with what he says. Presuming to tell another person what his motives are, in the absence of compelling evidence, is not nice. The truth is, he's pointing something out to you, and either you can't or don't wish to see it.

In freshman year he started sitting out the Pledge. He didn't ask for attention. He was abused and berated for it, and I even had to go to Supt. Mooney to get it to stop. All Matthew asked was to be allowed to sit quietly. It was the people who can't tolerate this kind of dissent, or don't understand it, who raised the fuss. We didn't go public with it, we handled it within the school system.

Not long after that, two students wrote a letter to the Kearny Observer saying that the only reason anyone would sit out the pledge is that they are unpatriotic. Because Matthew knew that wasn't true he wrote a letter in response. So for a second time his motives were impugned, and he acted to correct the facts.

So when you say he does these things for attention, you're wrong. Not just as a matter of opinion; you're wrong.

Sometimes people say "I don't understand why you're doing that." Sometimes they say it with exasperation, as though it's the other person's fault that they don't understand. Sometimes it is, but sometimes the best thing to do is pay attention to the first three words. You don't understand why he does it, so you try to fit his actions into your lack of understanding. It doesn't fit. Open your mind, try to see it as he sees it, then maybe you'll understand.

[Guest Guest]

I have never been spoken to by anyone about the need for me to sit quietly during the pledge and not do things like tap my pencil or hum out loud, and certainly not by the principal. It may have been a rumor that you heard, but I never make any noise during the pledge. If I did make disruptive noises during the pledge, then the teacher would have the right to tell me to stop. I am curious to know where you are getting this information, because it is simply not true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ummm...okay.