Paul LaClair is a Liar!

[Guest Guest]

Agree with 100%.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And I agree 5%...

Because everybody lies - and if you say you don't, you're a liar.

[Bern]

You name says all "from afar" that's where you should stay... far! You don't pay taxes in Kearny, therefore, your opinion in Kearny doesn't matter. When there is a problem in your town, feel free to say whatever you want.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What a mature response.

Instead of debating his arguments just state that his opinions don't matter.

[Guest Guest]

There. Now I proved it. Now what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, sir. What you proved was what you originally refused to answer...that you did send Matt into the meeting with the principal instead of going yourself. So now you decide to release the tapes because the time is right...because you somehow think it proves your point or will help you gather more support.

All it proves is that you first promoted the original taping, and then rather than attend a meeting you should have been at you decided to send the boy into it with his recorder again so that you could gather what you consider "evidence." What it also proves, in my opinion, is that a peaceful resolution to this situation was never your intent. You "proved it"? No, not in my opinion. What you proved is a whole lot uglier than what I'm guessing you intended to show.

"There. Now I proved it." seems a bit on the childish side. Or should I have used the term "snotty"...a term I shamelessly lifted from several of your past posts that have recently been directed towards others?

[Guest Guest]

There. Now I proved it. Now what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How old are you Paul? You look like a child, but anyway, you did prove. The cd was great to prove your son's ability to manupulate people and that the teacher in no way intimated Matthew. He was very kind and he even told Matthew, that it was never his intention to hurt him. It also showed the kind of person Paszkiewicz is. It showed that Matthew listened to those cds and was well prepared to go to that meeting. It shows that his intention was to make Paszkiewicz say what he wanted to hear. It shows the kind of person your son is. A person that cannot be trusted. This cd just made me admire Mr. P even more. This is the kind a person I want my children to be around, not people like you or your son. I feel bad for Matthew because he is growing up to be a bitter and sad person. Remember Paul, what goes around comes around. We do have good people who knows what is behind this hyprocy and there are people who you will never convience because of the kind of person you are. Mr. P did not lie...unlike your son, he was going by memory. He didn't have a cd to help him remember everything he said. I will be praying for you and for your son. You must be a very sad person.

[Guest Guest]

I think that an outsider's relatively dispassionate and disinterested view can be worthwhile. But you're absolutely correct that I don't have a vote on the matter and therefore the town is perfectly free to ignore my sentiments. Nevertheless, I will continue to "feel free" to say or write what I want at any time. If you don't like it, too bad. It's called free speech. Get used to it. If you can't, then I suggest you hold your breath and wait for me to stop feeling free to express my views.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Keep "watching from afar" That's all you can do!

[Guest Watching From Afar]

Keep "watching from afar"    That's all you can do!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think people care how others view them. Obviously you do, or you wouldn't have bothered to post a response to me.

[Guest Paul]

No, sir.  What you proved was what you originally refused to answer...that you did send Matt into the meeting with the principal instead of going yourself.  So now you decide to release the tapes because the time is right...because you somehow think it proves your point or will help you gather more support. 

All it proves is that you first promoted the original taping, and then rather than attend a meeting you should have been at you decided to send the boy into it with his recorder again so that you could gather what you consider "evidence."  What it also proves, in my opinion, is that a peaceful resolution to this situation was never your intent.  You "proved it"?  No, not in my opinion.  What you proved is a whole lot uglier than what I'm guessing you intended to show.

"There.  Now I proved it." seems a bit on the childish side.  Or should I have used the term "snotty"...a term I shamelessly lifted from several of your past posts that have recently been directed towards others?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What we proved is what we've said all along: That Mr. Paszkiewicz was not truthful in that meeting, that he attempted to bully and intimidate a student who (unfortunately for him) would not back down, and that the administrators in the room watched and allowed it to happen. Every ounce of it is shameful. They had a duty to that student and time after time they failed him to protect themselves.

You'd like to focus on our decisions, which are not the issue of public concern where public servants are involved, but the facts are what they are. No one forced any of these adults to do the wrong things --- but they did. And we've proved it. You just don't like it.

So you don't have to like my tone. But we were taunted to prove it, and we have. So now you get a dose of your own medicine. An adult would take his lumps and admit it. Some have, no doubt. Others never will. The more I see from the people who continue to defend this teacher and this administration, the more they define themselves. Contrary to how this may sound, I'm not bitter. But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide. How do you like it? And to make matters worse for you, there's no reasoned response available to you. Don't expect me to be nice about it.

[Guest Guest]

There. Now I proved it. Now what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What a "mature" man!

[Guest Guest]

What we proved is what we've said all along: That Mr. Paszkiewicz was not truthful in that meeting, that he attempted to bully and intimidate a student who (unfortunately for him) would not back down, and that the administrators in the room watched and allowed it to happen. Every ounce of it is shameful. They had a duty to that student and time after time they failed him to protect themselves.

You'd like to focus on our decisions, which are not the issue of public concern where public servants are involved, but the facts are what they are. No one forced any of these adults to do the wrong things --- but they did. And we've proved it. You just don't like it.

So you don't have to like my tone. But we were taunted to prove it, and we have. So now you get a dose of your own medicine. An adult would take his lumps and admit it. Some have, no doubt. Others never will. The more I see from the people who continue to defend this teacher and this administration, the more they define themselves. Contrary to how this may sound, I'm not bitter. But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide. How do you like it? And to make matters worse for you, there's no reasoned response available to you. Don't expect me to be nice about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul, I don't know about others or what they believe, and I don't particularly care if you reply or not. We all have our own opinions about the matter. Truthfully your pompous tone is tiring and you've lost enough credibility with me that it doesn't matter one way or the other if you do. However, your rudeness begs for a response.

Taunted to prove it? No, there was never a single question in my mind that you had a recording of the meeting. My issue was with the fact was that you were less than truthful when originally asked why you didn't put them out there.

You continue to declare that your intentions and motives have nothing to do with the issue, yet insist that the teacher's motives and intentions are critical. You can't have it both ways. If his motives and intentions count, then so do yours and your son's.

Just as no one forced "these adults to do the wrong things", no one forced you to try to make this into a political agenda issue. You need to include yourself in that sweeping accusation.

How do I like it? How do I like what? This has nothing to do with me. This has to do with you. It's no skin off my nose if you spend hours replying to every post that ticks you off. Go for it. Personally I was making an observation, and you seem to be responding with quite a bit of anger. Perhaps I hit closer to home than you'd like to admit.

I do have to admit to a bit of confusion. "But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide." lol I get what back? I was hiding? No, simply giving my opinion to which you over reacted. There are those of us who believe you and the teacher were both wrong. That doesn't make me a supporter of either side. However, as someone on one of the boards pointed out...the teacher seems to have stopped his poor behaviour, while yours continues. To date I haven't heard the teacher stoop to calling anyone names, including the "snotty" phrase you seem to be enthralled with. Come to think of it, I haven't heard mention of even an instance of the teacher on a public forum continually trying to discredit you personally as you seem to be trying to do with him.

You do seem to have doubts about yourself though. Those who continually try to convince others how "right" they are, are usually the ones who are the least sure themselves that they are.

[Guest Guest]

What we proved is what we've said all along: That Mr. Paszkiewicz was not truthful in that meeting, that he attempted to bully and intimidate a student who (unfortunately for him) would not back down, and that the administrators in the room watched and allowed it to happen. Every ounce of it is shameful. They had a duty to that student and time after time they failed him to protect themselves.

You'd like to focus on our decisions, which are not the issue of public concern where public servants are involved, but the facts are what they are. No one forced any of these adults to do the wrong things --- but they did. And we've proved it. You just don't like it.

So you don't have to like my tone. But we were taunted to prove it, and we have. So now you get a dose of your own medicine. An adult would take his lumps and admit it. Some have, no doubt. Others never will. The more I see from the people who continue to defend this teacher and this administration, the more they define themselves. Contrary to how this may sound, I'm not bitter. But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide. How do you like it? And to make matters worse for you, there's no reasoned response available to you. Don't expect me to be nice about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So what wasnt truthful about telling about your son's other antics, anti-Bush stickers all over his locker, wearing a dress, for example, before someone leaked them out. Wondering what else is in that closet.

I don't ever recall you being nice so why start now.

For a long time this has not been your son's battle, but your public attack to the Board of Ed and the destruction of a teacher's career.

[Strife767]

What a "mature" man!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He just made a lot of people look like morons for calling him a liar. I guess none of you are honorable enough to apologize for it, huh?

[Strife767]

How old are you Paul? You look like a child,

As opposed to the people who insisted he was a liar without the slightest evidence?

but anyway, you did prove.

Uh, "prove" is usually transitive, you know.

The cd was great to prove your son's ability to manupulate people

So you assert that a teacher of 15 years was manipulated by a student who has been ALIVE for only a year longer than he's been teaching? Sorry, but no judge would fall for that. Paszkiewicz is accountable for what he said--no one forced words out of his mouth.

and that the teacher in no way intimated Matthew.

While he whined about how he's been teaching so long and has four kids and this letter could ruin him etc. etc. Paszkiewicz played the whole meeting as if he did nothing wrong, and Matthew was spreading dirty false rumors about him. He had no idea Matthew had proof of his transgressions, and it showed in his dishonest attempt to slither his way out of the crosshairs.

He was very kind and he even told Matthew, that it was never his intention to hurt him. It also showed the kind of person Paszkiewicz is.

Yeah, a liar.

It showed that Matthew listened to those cds and was well prepared to go to that meeting.

And why shouldn't he be? What's wrong with having proof of your claims? Isn't that what you pathetic apologists kept whining about the lack of when Paul first talked about Paszkiewicz having denied much of what he said in the meeting? You guys bitched like crazy at the lack of proof. Well, now you have it, yet you keep whining. Sad, really.

It shows that his intention was to make Paszkiewicz say what he wanted to hear.

How? Matthew read direct quotes of Paszkiewicz's and asked him if he said them or not. Did Matthew "manipulate" him into lying?

It shows the kind of person your son is. A person that cannot be trusted.

Cry me a river. Paszkiewicz proved he couldn't be trusted. He was caught lying several times--Matthew never was. And yet Matthew's the one you insist "cannot be trusted." How ridiculous.

This cd just made me admire Mr. P even more. This is the kind a person I want my children to be around, not people like you or your son.

Why do you despise the Constitution? Why would you admire someone who has no respect for it?

I feel bad for Matthew because he is growing up to be a bitter and sad person.

How ridiculously presumptuous.

Remember Paul, what goes around comes around. We do have good people who knows what is behind this hyprocy and there are people who you will never convience because of the kind of person you are.

Yeah, rational and unclouded by religious fervor. I realize it's nearly impossible to convince a sheep like you, but thankfully, it wasn't people like you who _wrote_ the Constitution. The Constitution is wholly on the LaClairs' side--you'll be forced to realize that one way or the other.

Mr. P did not lie...unlike your son, he was going by memory. He didn't have a cd to help him remember everything he said.

Okay, answer me these questions then:

1. Why did he flatly deny saying several of the statements instead of saying he didn't remember, if he's so honest?

2. How do you explain the times when he asserted he did not say on of the statements, because he insisted he would not say something like that? A statement about what one WOULD or WOULDN'T do has NOTHING to do with memory.

Your lies will not distract any rational person from his. Stop making excuses for him--you're just making yourself look like an idiot by lying to defend a liar.

I will be praying for you and for your son.

"One of the most condescending things a theist can do...is to make a point of announcing that they'll be praying for [someone]...even theists can't think that prayer will be more effective for having announced. So what's the purpose? Some say that it's to express well-wishes, but people say that they'll pray for someone when the person is sick or having trouble. One way or another, the theist appears to be expressing superiority...in a passive-aggressive manner. That suggests they weren't interested in serious conversation to begin with." --http://tinyurl.com/29rshl

That attitude is positively disgusting.

You must be a very sad person.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How would you know, arrogant scum?

[Guest Guest]

There. Now I proved it. Now what?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Prove it in court already!

[Calybos]

What a "mature" man!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good thing he's right, huh?

[Guest Guest]

What we proved is what we've said all along: That Mr. Paszkiewicz was not truthful in that meeting, that he attempted to bully and intimidate a student who (unfortunately for him) would not back down, and that the administrators in the room watched and allowed it to happen. Every ounce of it is shameful. They had a duty to that student and time after time they failed him to protect themselves.

You'd like to focus on our decisions, which are not the issue of public concern where public servants are involved, but the facts are what they are. No one forced any of these adults to do the wrong things --- but they did. And we've proved it. You just don't like it.

So you don't have to like my tone. But we were taunted to prove it, and we have. So now you get a dose of your own medicine. An adult would take his lumps and admit it. Some have, no doubt. Others never will. The more I see from the people who continue to defend this teacher and this administration, the more they define themselves. Contrary to how this may sound, I'm not bitter. But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide. How do you like it? And to make matters worse for you, there's no reasoned response available to you. Don't expect me to be nice about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From this mornings news:

Title: "At least 20 killed as twisters slam several states"

Eight students were killed when a tornado struck Enterprise High School, blowing out the walls and collapsing part of the roof, Mayor Kenneth Boswell said Friday. They were all in one wing of the school that took a direct hit, he said.

‘Praying the whole time’

At Enterprise High School, officials had been watching the storm Thursday as it swept through southern Missouri and headed into Alabama. The students were preparing to leave for the day when the sirens started up and the lights went out.

Teacher Grannison Wagstaff was with them.

“I said ‘Here it comes. Hit the deck,” he told CBS’s “The Early Show” Friday. “I turned around and I could actually see the tornado coming toward me.”

As the students scrambled for shelter, a section of roof and a wall near 17-year-old senior Erin Garcia collapsed on her classmates.

“I was just sitting there praying the whole time,” Erin said. “It sounded like a bunch of people trying to beat the wall down. People didn’t know where to go. They were trying to lead us out of the building.

“I kept seeing people with blood on their faces,” she said.

Outside, debris from the school was strewn around the neighborhood, where cars were flipped or tossed atop each other.

The mayor said officials had yet to determine where students in the school of about 2,000 would attend classes for the rest of the year. He appeared drained as his staff and National Guard crews tried to assess the damage at dawn and search the torn-up neighborhoods for more victims.

Now Mr. LaClair, tell it to those students that their constitution rights were violated for praying in school. Think about that as you sleep in comfortably in your warm bed.

[Guest Guest]

What we proved is what we've said all along: That Mr. Paszkiewicz was not truthful in that meeting, that he attempted to bully and intimidate a student who (unfortunately for him) would not back down, and that the administrators in the room watched and allowed it to happen. Every ounce of it is shameful. They had a duty to that student and time after time they failed him to protect themselves.

You'd like to focus on our decisions, which are not the issue of public concern where public servants are involved, but the facts are what they are. No one forced any of these adults to do the wrong things --- but they did. And we've proved it. You just don't like it.

So you don't have to like my tone. But we were taunted to prove it, and we have. So now you get a dose of your own medicine. An adult would take his lumps and admit it. Some have, no doubt. Others never will. The more I see from the people who continue to defend this teacher and this administration, the more they define themselves. Contrary to how this may sound, I'm not bitter. But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide. How do you like it? And to make matters worse for you, there's no reasoned response available to you. Don't expect me to be nice about it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can quote the "intimidation" part?

[Guest Paul]

Paul, I don't know about others or what they believe, and I don't particularly care if you reply or not.  We all have our own opinions about the matter.  Truthfully your pompous tone is tiring and you've lost enough credibility with me that it doesn't matter one way or the other if you do.  However, your rudeness begs for a response. 

Taunted to prove it?  No, there was never a single question in my mind that you had a recording of the meeting.  My issue was with the fact was that you were less than truthful when originally asked why you didn't put them out there. 

You continue to declare that your intentions and motives have nothing to do with the issue, yet insist that the teacher's motives and intentions are critical.  You can't have it both ways.  If his motives and intentions count, then so do yours and your son's.

Just as no one forced "these adults to do the wrong things", no one forced you to try to make this into a political agenda issue.  You need to include yourself in that sweeping accusation.

How do I like it?  How do I like what?  This has nothing to do with me.  This has to do with you. It's no skin off my nose if you spend hours replying to every post that ticks you off.  Go for it.  Personally I was making an observation, and you seem to be responding with quite a bit of anger.  Perhaps I hit closer to home than you'd like to admit.

I do have to admit to a bit of confusion.  "But now you get it right back, and you have nowhere to hide."  lol  I get what back?  I was hiding?  No, simply giving my opinion to which you over reacted.  There are those of us who believe you and the teacher were both wrong.  That doesn't make me a supporter of either side.  However, as someone on one of the boards pointed out...the teacher seems to have stopped his poor behaviour, while yours continues.  To date I haven't heard the teacher stoop to calling anyone names, including the "snotty" phrase you seem to be enthralled with.  Come to think of it, I haven't heard mention of even an instance of the teacher on a public forum continually trying to discredit you personally as you seem to be trying to do with him.

You do seem to have doubts about yourself though.  Those who continually try to convince others how "right" they are, are usually the ones who are the least sure themselves that they are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can't tell which of the many "guests" you are. What I can tell from this post is that you don't place the same importance on the Constitutional and educational issues this situation has raised. If you did, you wouldn't be writing what you're writing, and like others who do see those issues, you would probably see things differently. For example, you wouldn't put it as our not "being forced" to raised these issues; you would recognize that we raise them because we think they are important. You wouldn't suggest a parallel between our motives and those of the teacher: he is a public servant with a resposibility to students and taxpayers; we are not. My tone wouldn't much matter to you. The principle would trump the personality. You would recognize that my remark about being taunted didn't pertain to you, since you are not among the "guests" who made the comment. Maybe you don't realize how many biases are obvious just from the little that you wrote; but they are obvious.

It frustrates me that people don't see how important these issues are, and in your particular case can't seem to see the issues at all. So while it may come across to you as pompous, I see these things, and so do Leigh, Strife, Calybos and many others. You're obviously not a stupid person, yet it's as though you don't see the issues at all, or don't care about them. That goes right along with a culture that cares more about Anna Nicole's rotting corpse or Britney's next public vomit than about the plethora of real issues that could be on the news but aren't because people don't care enough about things that really matter. So instead we get an endless diet of how the candidate looks on TV.

Here the issue is a public school teacher not just crossing the line, but doing everything he can to obliterate it; and yet you want to focus on our motives in bringing an undeniable violation to public attention. It's not our word against Mr. Paszkiewicz's; it's his word against the law. Democracy and the Constitution will not survive if people insist on turning everything into a contest between designated participants, instead of focusing on real issues. That's the source of my frustration.

So to clarify: Several people taunted me to prove my accusations. Now they are proved, but as Strife points out, not one of those people has come forward with an apology or even an acknowledgement. If you are not one of the people who made that accusation, then obviously the remark was not directed at you; but how can you expect me to tell which "guest" you are?

[Guest Paul]

From this mornings news:

Title: "At least 20 killed as twisters slam several states"

Eight students were killed when a tornado struck Enterprise High School, blowing out the walls and collapsing part of the roof, Mayor Kenneth Boswell said Friday. They were all in one wing of the school that took a direct hit, he said.

‘Praying the whole time’

At Enterprise High School, officials had been watching the storm Thursday as it swept through southern Missouri and headed into Alabama. The students were preparing to leave for the day when the sirens started up and the lights went out.

Teacher Grannison Wagstaff was with them.

“I said ‘Here it comes. Hit the deck,” he told CBS’s “The Early Show” Friday. “I turned around and I could actually see the tornado coming toward me.”

As the students scrambled for shelter, a section of roof and a wall near 17-year-old senior Erin Garcia collapsed on her classmates.

“I was just sitting there praying the whole time,” Erin said. “It sounded like a bunch of people trying to beat the wall down. People didn’t know where to go. They were trying to lead us out of the building.

“I kept seeing people with blood on their faces,” she said.

Outside, debris from the school was strewn around the neighborhood, where cars were flipped or tossed atop each other.

The mayor said officials had yet to determine where students in the school of about 2,000 would attend classes for the rest of the year. He appeared drained as his staff and National Guard crews tried to assess the damage at dawn and search the torn-up neighborhoods for more victims.

Now Mr. LaClair, tell it to those students that their constitution rights were violated for praying in school. Think about that as you sleep in comfortably in your warm bed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Erin had every right to pray. You don't get it at all, do you?

[Guest Paul]

From this mornings news:

Title: "At least 20 killed as twisters slam several states"

Eight students were killed when a tornado struck Enterprise High School, blowing out the walls and collapsing part of the roof, Mayor Kenneth Boswell said Friday. They were all in one wing of the school that took a direct hit, he said.

‘Praying the whole time’

At Enterprise High School, officials had been watching the storm Thursday as it swept through southern Missouri and headed into Alabama. The students were preparing to leave for the day when the sirens started up and the lights went out.

Teacher Grannison Wagstaff was with them.

“I said ‘Here it comes. Hit the deck,” he told CBS’s “The Early Show” Friday. “I turned around and I could actually see the tornado coming toward me.”

As the students scrambled for shelter, a section of roof and a wall near 17-year-old senior Erin Garcia collapsed on her classmates.

“I was just sitting there praying the whole time,” Erin said. “It sounded like a bunch of people trying to beat the wall down. People didn’t know where to go. They were trying to lead us out of the building.

“I kept seeing people with blood on their faces,” she said.

Outside, debris from the school was strewn around the neighborhood, where cars were flipped or tossed atop each other.

The mayor said officials had yet to determine where students in the school of about 2,000 would attend classes for the rest of the year. He appeared drained as his staff and National Guard crews tried to assess the damage at dawn and search the torn-up neighborhoods for more victims.

Now Mr. LaClair, tell it to those students that their constitution rights were violated for praying in school. Think about that as you sleep in comfortably in your warm bed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

By the way, if anyone had tried to stop Erin from praying, I would defend her right to pray and so would the ACLU; just as the ACLU recently sided with Mr. Paszkiewicz's personal attorney (Demetrios Stratis - sp?) in defending the right of a Christian student to sing a religious song in a school event. It was her song, and she had the right to choose anything she wanted.

You're shouting so loudly, you can't even see what's going on. If you want to understand where these legal lines are drawn, and why, you'll have to stop shouting and make a real effort to understand the law.

[Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo]

From this mornings news:

Title: "At least 20 killed as twisters slam several states"

Eight students were killed when a tornado struck Enterprise High School, blowing out the walls and collapsing part of the roof, Mayor Kenneth Boswell said Friday. They were all in one wing of the school that took a direct hit, he said.

‘Praying the whole time’

At Enterprise High School, officials had been watching the storm Thursday as it swept through southern Missouri and headed into Alabama. The students were preparing to leave for the day when the sirens started up and the lights went out.

Teacher Grannison Wagstaff was with them.

“I said ‘Here it comes. Hit the deck,” he told CBS’s “The Early Show” Friday. “I turned around and I could actually see the tornado coming toward me.”

As the students scrambled for shelter, a section of roof and a wall near 17-year-old senior Erin Garcia collapsed on her classmates.

“I was just sitting there praying the whole time,” Erin said. “It sounded like a bunch of people trying to beat the wall down. People didn’t know where to go. They were trying to lead us out of the building.

“I kept seeing people with blood on their faces,” she said.

Outside, debris from the school was strewn around the neighborhood, where cars were flipped or tossed atop each other.

The mayor said officials had yet to determine where students in the school of about 2,000 would attend classes for the rest of the year. He appeared drained as his staff and National Guard crews tried to assess the damage at dawn and search the torn-up neighborhoods for more victims.

Now Mr. LaClair, tell it to those students that their constitution rights were violated for praying in school. Think about that as you sleep in comfortably in your warm bed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's an absurd comparison and I think you know it. Someone praying under severe circumstances compared to a teacher "preaching" to his class hardly comparable.

[Guest qetzal]

That's an absurd comparison and I think you know it. Someone praying under severe circumstances compared to a teacher "preaching" to his class hardly comparable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, it's absurd, but I doubt Guest knows it. I think you're giving this particular Guest way too much credit.

I'd also like to politely disagree that it's the severe circumstances that really make the comparison absurd. The absurdity comes in comparing a student's personal prayer to a teacher's arguing in class that his religion is factually true.

I have no beef whatsoever with a student or a teacher who prays in their capacity as a private citizen. That was clearly the case with the tornado. However, I have every concern with a teacher who argues the truth of their religion in class. That's unconstitutional and wrong. Somehow, I doubt Guest understands that either.

[Strife767]

Prove it in court already!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL, you morons must think you're calling Paul's bluff or something. This new line is just too funny.

[Strife767]

Now Mr. LaClair, tell it to those students that their constitution rights were violated for praying in school.

Hey, Mr. D**bA** straw man builder--please point out where ANYONE on Matthew's side EVER claimed that it was unconstitutional for a student to pray in school, as if you can. Idiot.

[Guest Watching From Afar]

Paul, I don't know about others or what they believe, and I don't particularly care if you reply or not.  We all have our own opinions about the matter.  Truthfully your pompous tone is tiring and you've lost enough credibility with me that it doesn't matter one way or the other if you do.  However, your rudeness begs for a response.

Frankly, as I've looked through this thread the so-called "Christians" have been far ruder and more pompous than anyone else. The level of vitriol aimed at the student and his father here has been over the top.

You continue to declare that your intentions and motives have nothing to do with the issue, yet insist that the teacher's motives and intentions are critical.  You can't have it both ways.  If his motives and intentions count, then so do yours and your son's.

Motives are irrelevant here. The teacher's behavior counts, as does the school district's. The teacher lost control of his class; he turned it into a pulpit; he spouted uneducated nonsense about evolution; the school district tolerated it for years on end. That's all we need to consider.

Just as no one forced "these adults to do the wrong things", no one forced you to try to make this into a political agenda issue.

The student and his father complained to the district, which arrogantly ignored them and did nothing. This gave them two alternatives: Keep pursuing their complaint or tolerate the teacher's conduct. Only after several months of waiting did the student and his father say anything. They gave the district plenty of time to remedy the situation. This is the district's fault, not the student or his father's fault.

There are those of us who believe you and the teacher were both wrong.  That doesn't make me a supporter of either side.  However, as someone on one of the boards pointed out...the teacher seems to have stopped his poor behaviour, while yours continues.

Ah, yes. Find fault with both sides to invalidate the complaint. It's a well-worn tactic, but it's a transparent dodge. Not to mention the old adage, "First you drive them crazy, then you call them crazy."

I have expressed some reservations about grandstanding by the student's father. But the more I read about this, the more understandable it is. These people have been subjected to sheer hatred from so-called "Christians" nationwide, and the local school district has been arrogant, obtuse and vindictive. It's only natural for the father to get ticked off. I'd be upset too.

In any case, any missteps by the father or the student do not cancel out the teacher's incompetence and the school administration's malfeasance. The complainants aren't required to be faultless human beings. All that matters is whether their complaint is accurate and significant, and it is both of those things.

The teacher should be fired, along with the school's principal and/or whoever else let that teacher turn his class into a church for so many years. The school district should immediately take steps to insure that any harrassment of the student stop. The so-called "Christians" who have been baiting the teacher's father should stop it.

To date I haven't heard the teacher stoop to calling anyone names, including the "snotty" phrase you seem to be enthralled with.

The so-called "Christians" who post here have done that in spades. You are hateful people, befitting your zealotry.

Those who continually try to convince others how "right" they are, are usually the ones who are the least sure themselves that they are.

This is the same logic that the Catholic Church used during the Spanish and Portugese inquisitions. For the accused to defend himself was taken as a sign of guilt. Why shouldn't the student's father speak his mind? This is America, and free speech is his right.

You "Christians" should be embarrassed by that teacher's exceedingly clumsy injection of religious dogma, along with his academic ignorance and rank incompetence. The man is unfit to teach, and at every stage the administration did a rotten job of handling the situation.

If this is the best the "Christians" can offer, then you've got a lot of dry rot both on the doctrinal side of things and in the quality of your congregations, to put it mildly. Something similar goes for Kearny, New Jersey. If I were sitting on a university admissions committee, I would question the academic credentials of that school system's graduates.

If the system is retaining teachers like this Paszkiewicz, well, it's pretty rare to find only one cockroach. You have to wonder what other problems they have, and how they are being reflected in the qualifications of its graduating high school seniors. Parents should be asking some tough questions. Last time I looked, New Jersey wasn't exactly a low-tax haven. You deserve a lot more than this for what you are paying.

[Guest Paul]

Can quote the "intimidation" part?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I just posted a new topic to address this question. Keep your eye out for it, because as you know posts are not put up until after KOTW reviews them.