I'm finished I can't take it

[Guest Paul]

You're the liar.  You're just as fanatical about your beliefs as any of the Christian "fundies" that you fear so much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There's a difference between fanaticism based on facts, versus fanatacism based on a mere wish, or desire to believe something. Zealousness in conformance with the facts is a good thing. Not only does it generally lead in the right direction, but it allows someone like Strife to change course when the evidence shows that to be the best thing to do. By contrast, zealotry in defense of wishes masquerading as truth leads to little but trouble. It's random because it's not connected to the real world where the facts are, and because it is indifferent to the facts it doesn't allow for correction. That adds an unhealthy dimension to the zealotry, and marks the difference between zealousness and zealotry. That's the difference, and it's a big one.

[Strife767]

You're the liar.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

You're just as fanatical about your beliefs as any of the Christian "fundies" that you fear so much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please--just because I point out how little sense theistic religions make, doesn't mean I'm "fanatical."

If you can't see the difference between abusing a position of power to preach unconstitutionally to a class of public school students, and my own statements here on this public online forum, then I truly pity you.

Please, I'm really curious--care to cite a case of "atheist fundamentalism" that comes even close to comparing to wanting to remove the teaching of evolution from public schools, or bombing an abortion clinic? I'll wait.

[Guest Tom]

You're a phoney.  Matt wouldn't have done anything because he wouldn't have been able to make an issue out of it.  And I can say that on the same basis as you asking what if it was a teacher taling about Islam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can say anything you like, and you do, but it's not true. Matthew has displayed uncommon courage and integrity. His classmates did not, and the community as a whole did not. So you can't compare his actions to theirs. Even by your own admission he takes his own path, which no one else wants to take. You can't have it both ways, but that doesn't stop you from trying.

There is every reason to believe that a Muslim fundamentalist making a similar case for Islam in Kearny High would have been thrown out on his ear, which means (given that the Christian fundie, who was preaching anti-scientific ignorance to boot, was not thrown out on his ear) that the community is operating from its narrow prejudices. Kearny has made that very clear, and now they want to blame the kid for letting them show their own true colors. It's not his fault. It's yours.

But of course that's the last thing you'll ever admit, especially to yourselves, so it has to be his fault. Isn't religious fundamentalism wonderful. It has an answer for everything!

[Stixx3969]

You're the liar.  You're just as fanatical about your beliefs as any of the Christian "fundies" that you fear so much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

One shouldn't be surprised. When to pendulum swings too far one way you can be sure that it will swing back just as far in the opposite direction.

[Guest Guest]

Not true. You don't know what I want. I'd be perfectly happy to have all religions represented in a display. It wouldn't show favoritism and therefore would not violate the Constitution or anyone's interests. So why should I oppose it? I wouldn't and I don't. In fact, what that does is give Humanism, Buddhism, etc., a place at the table of religions and remind people that there are many religions. I am completely in favor of that. It's the exact opposite, the perfect antidote, of a Christian town displaying the nativity scene and nothing else. Is it possible that you're the ones who are driven crazy because you're not getting the exclusivity you want?

Try as you will, you can't put me into your narrow little box. You're obviously angry, but you don't understand how I think at all. Wouldn't you be a lot happier and a lot more productive by listening for a change? By giving credit that someone else just might have thought about these things in a way that you have not? How else can we learn from others? Or do you already know everything? If you presume to know what I think and how I feel, you presume to know more than you do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know what you think and feel by your actions.

[Guest Guest]

That's not true. Matt is very principled, whether you are willing to admit it or not. I hate to say it, but the biases here in town were and are obvious. Do you seriously believe that a Muslim teacher would have gotten away with this sort of thing? He would not.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it's safe to say that it would not bother me or most people if a teacher spoke about his or her religious or non-religious beliefs. Teachers do it all of the time, all over the country. I wouldn't see any reason to make a case out of it.

[Guest Guest]

Not true. You don't know what I want. I'd be perfectly happy to have all religions represented in a display. It wouldn't show favoritism and therefore would not violate the Constitution or anyone's interests. So why should I oppose it? I wouldn't and I don't. In fact, what that does is give Humanism, Buddhism, etc., a place at the table of religions and remind people that there are many religions. I am completely in favor of that. It's the exact opposite, the perfect antidote, of a Christian town displaying the nativity scene and nothing else. Is it possible that you're the ones who are driven crazy because you're not getting the exclusivity you want?

Try as you will, you can't put me into your narrow little box. You're obviously angry, but you don't understand how I think at all. Wouldn't you be a lot happier and a lot more productive by listening for a change? By giving credit that someone else just might have thought about these things in a way that you have not? How else can we learn from others? Or do you already know everything? If you presume to know what I think and how I feel, you presume to know more than you do

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So how are all religions included in the town hall display?

[Guest Guest]

You can say anything you like, and you do, but it's not true. Matthew has displayed uncommon courage and integrity. His classmates did not, and the community as a whole did not. So you can't compare his actions to theirs. Even by your own admission he takes his own path, which no one else wants to take. You can't have it both ways, but that doesn't stop you from trying.

There is every reason to believe that a Muslim fundamentalist making a similar case for Islam in Kearny High would have been thrown out on his ear, which means (given that the Christian fundie, who was preaching anti-scientific ignorance to boot, was not thrown out on his ear) that the community is operating from its narrow prejudices. Kearny has made that very clear, and now they want to blame the kid for letting them show their own true colors. It's not his fault. It's yours.

But of course that's the last thing you'll ever admit, especially to yourselves, so it has to be his fault. Isn't religious fundamentalism wonderful. It has an answer for everything!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You don't have proof of what would happen to a teacher that was talking about his beliefs. Saying that a Muslim teacher would be fired does not make it true. I'm sure that the seperation of church and state line is crossed by people in this country all of the time. The legal system and the ability of government to operate would grind to a halt if everyone that perceives that their rights were violated did what Matt did.

Mr. P crossed that line and should be disciplined. However, portraying Matt as an altruistic hero is a joke. He found an easy target and went after him. There are many back stories that most people posting here are not aware of.

[Guest Paul]

I know what you think and feel by your actions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cheap shot. Be specific. Please draw the connection between my actions (be specific) and my thoughts and feelings. Give it your best shot. If I'm doing something wrong, you'll do me a great service by pointing it out. You can do it here or you can do it privately if you prefer.

[Guest Paul]

I think it's safe to say that it would not bother me or most people if a teacher spoke about his or her religious or non-religious beliefs.  Teachers do it all of the time, all over the country.  I wouldn't see any reason to make a case out of it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1. Do you seriously believe that it would not bother most Kearny residents if a Muslim fundamentalist told a class of Kearny High students that they belong in hell if they do not accept Allah? Are you really saying that?

2. Teachers do not proselytize like this all over the country. I went to school in a rural area that was quite religious and never heard anything coming anywhere close to this.

3. The other problem with what you're saying is that what would bother most people is not the standard. The issue is the majority stepping on the minority. If you water down the Constitution that way, you will destroy it.

[Guest Paul]

So how are all religions included in the town hall display?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're probably right. Maybe they're not all there. Would you like me to raise a fuss about that this year, too? As I understand it, the current display complies with the law, which is all I have the right to insist on.

Is there anything I could ever say that you wouldn't argue with?

[Guest Paul]

You don't have proof of what would happen to a teacher that was talking about his beliefs.  Saying that a Muslim teacher would be fired does not make it true.  I'm sure that the seperation of church and state line is crossed by people in this country all of the time.  The legal system and the ability of government to operate would grind to a halt if everyone that perceives that their rights were violated did what Matt did.

Mr. P crossed that line and should be disciplined.  However, portraying Matt as an altruistic hero is a joke.  He found an easy target and went after him.  There are many back stories that most people posting here are not aware of.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The legal system would not grind to a halt if everyone did what Matt did when there was a violation like this. What would happen is that people like Paszkiewicz would behave themselves because they would know they couldn't get away with it.

[Guest Paul]

Mr. P crossed that line and should be disciplined.  However, portraying Matt as an altruistic hero is a joke.  He found an easy target and went after him. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry for posting on this twice, but Matt did not find an easy target and go after him. If that was his intention, he would have taken the recordings straight to the press in September. Instead, he wrote a letter of complaint to the principal. Paszkiewicz was reprimanded and stopped the proselytizing, but started whining in open class that he couldn't conduct the class the same way any more. His big mistake was saying in open class that he would like to answer a student's question, but "someone might change my words." Matthew recognized that this was directed at him, which Paszkiewicz never denied even after Matthew confronted him with it, and that is why he insisted on a meeting in Mr. Somma's office.

He gave Mr. Paszkiewicz another chance to tell the truth in that meeting. However, whenever there's a chance to tell the truth, there's also a chance not to tell the truth. It's not a set-up. It's how things work. Not only that, Paszkiewicz used the opportunity to bully and intimidate a student he didn't agree with (which is a common theme I've heard from several of his other students he didn't agree with over the years), but unfortunately for him, this time he chose a student who was more than his equal, and who had him headed off at every pass. In a way, Matthew stood up for every student this teacher ever bullied or intimidated, which is why the cheers from some former students were so loud.

Now you may not find it particularly courageous, but I think that when a sixteen-year-old high school student who is about 5'7" tall and very thin is sitting in the principal's office right next to his 38-year-old teacher, who is fit and over six feet tall; and then that student essentially cross-examines the teacher for nearly an hour, in the face of repeated interruptions and lectures from the teacher; and the principal is doing nothing to protect the student; and then the teacher denies making statements that the student knows he made; and then the student, sitting right next to this teacher who has spent the better part of an hour trying to intimidate him (and across from the principal, who is the teacher's former coach and teacher, and now his friend), unzips his back pack and not only produces recordings proving beyond a doubt that the teacher has not told the truth, but hands a copy of these very recordings to the teacher himself . . . yeah, you go ahead and tell me you would have had the courage to do that. But don't even bother if you won't state your name, because I'd like to see some hard proof on that one. Matthew has the proof. You don't. You may not like it, but what Matt did is extremely rare. Your saying it isn't courageous is a joke, especially when you hide behind your cloak of anonymity to do it.

Go ahead, wise guy. Show us that you'd be willing to do something like that. Don't even bother posting here to claim that you would. Show us like Matthew did. Let us know when you have something to report.

[Strife767]

I know what you think and feel by your actions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yet how dare anyone infer a preaching teacher's motives and feelings in the same way, right?

The hypocrisy is truly ridiculous.

[Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo]

Sorry for posting on this twice, but Matt did not find an easy target and go after him. If that was his intention, he would have taken the recordings straight to the press in September. Instead, he wrote a letter of complaint to the principal. Paszkiewicz was reprimanded and stopped the proselytizing, but started whining in open class that he couldn't conduct the class the same way any more. His big mistake was saying in open class that he would like to answer a student's question, but "someone might change my words." Matthew recognized that this was directed at him, which Paszkiewicz never denied even after Matthew confronted him with it, and that is why he insisted on a meeting in Mr. Somma's office.

He gave Mr. Paszkiewicz another chance to tell the truth in that meeting. However, whenever there's a chance to tell the truth, there's also a chance not to tell the truth. It's not a set-up. It's how things work. Not only that, Paszkiewicz used the opportunity to bully and intimidate a student he didn't agree with (which is a common theme I've heard from several of his other students he didn't agree with over the years), but unfortunately for him, this time he chose a student who was more than his equal, and who had him headed off at every pass. In a way, Matthew stood up for every student this teacher ever bullied or intimidated, which is why the cheers from some former students were so loud.

Now you may not find it particularly courageous, but I think that when a sixteen-year-old high school student who is about 5'7" tall and very thin is sitting in the principal's office right next to his 38-year-old teacher, who is fit and over six feet tall; and then that student essentially cross-examines the teacher for nearly an hour, in the face of repeated interruptions and lectures from the teacher; and the principal is doing nothing to protect the student; and then the teacher denies making statements that the student knows he made; and then the student, sitting right next to this teacher who has spent the better part of an hour trying to intimidate him (and across from the principal, who is the teacher's former coach and teacher, and now his friend), unzips his back pack and not only produces recordings proving beyond a doubt that the teacher has not told the truth, but hands a copy of these very recordings to the teacher himself . . . yeah, you go ahead and tell me you would have had the courage to do that. But don't even bother if you won't state your name, because I'd like to see some hard proof on that one. Matthew has the proof. You don't. You may not like it, but what Matt did is extremely rare. Your saying it isn't courageous is a joke, especially when you hide behind your cloak of anonymity to do it.

Go ahead, wise guy. Show us that you'd be willing to do something like that. Don't even bother posting here to claim that you would. Show us like Matthew did. Let us know when you have something to report.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree Paul. I find it amusing how many of those who mock Matt do so while remaining anonymous.

[Guest Guest]

Sorry for posting on this twice, but Matt did not find an easy target and go after him. If that was his intention, he would have taken the recordings straight to the press in September. Instead, he wrote a letter of complaint to the principal. Paszkiewicz was reprimanded and stopped the proselytizing, but started whining in open class that he couldn't conduct the class the same way any more. His big mistake was saying in open class that he would like to answer a student's question, but "someone might change my words." Matthew recognized that this was directed at him, which Paszkiewicz never denied even after Matthew confronted him with it, and that is why he insisted on a meeting in Mr. Somma's office.

He gave Mr. Paszkiewicz another chance to tell the truth in that meeting. However, whenever there's a chance to tell the truth, there's also a chance not to tell the truth. It's not a set-up. It's how things work. Not only that, Paszkiewicz used the opportunity to bully and intimidate a student he didn't agree with (which is a common theme I've heard from several of his other students he didn't agree with over the years), but unfortunately for him, this time he chose a student who was more than his equal, and who had him headed off at every pass. In a way, Matthew stood up for every student this teacher ever bullied or intimidated, which is why the cheers from some former students were so loud.

Now you may not find it particularly courageous, but I think that when a sixteen-year-old high school student who is about 5'7" tall and very thin is sitting in the principal's office right next to his 38-year-old teacher, who is fit and over six feet tall; and then that student essentially cross-examines the teacher for nearly an hour, in the face of repeated interruptions and lectures from the teacher; and the principal is doing nothing to protect the student; and then the teacher denies making statements that the student knows he made; and then the student, sitting right next to this teacher who has spent the better part of an hour trying to intimidate him (and across from the principal, who is the teacher's former coach and teacher, and now his friend), unzips his back pack and not only produces recordings proving beyond a doubt that the teacher has not told the truth, but hands a copy of these very recordings to the teacher himself . . . yeah, you go ahead and tell me you would have had the courage to do that. But don't even bother if you won't state your name, because I'd like to see some hard proof on that one. Matthew has the proof. You don't. You may not like it, but what Matt did is extremely rare. Your saying it isn't courageous is a joke, especially when you hide behind your cloak of anonymity to do it.

Go ahead, wise guy. Show us that you'd be willing to do something like that. Don't even bother posting here to claim that you would. Show us like Matthew did. Let us know when you have something to report.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please stop it Paul. You know damn well that Paszkiewicz's size has nothing to do with this. Or are you now saying that Matt was in physical danger from Paszkiewicz and Somma.

Paszkiewicz was an easy target. One that Matt has been looking for for quite some awhile.

And I never said he didn't play this right. By Matt not going to the media right away and you not demanding to be in the meeting with Paszkiewicz and Somma you played this perfectly.

[Guest Guest]

You're probably right. Maybe they're not all there. Would you like me to raise a fuss about that this year, too? As I understand it, the current display complies with the law, which is all I have the right to insist on.

Is there anything I could ever say that you wouldn't argue with?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm probably right. You might change my mind once in awhile if you didn't think you were always right.

[Guest Guest]

Yet how dare anyone infer a preaching teacher's motives and feelings in the same way, right?

The hypocrisy is truly ridiculous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I didn't say the teacher wasn't wrong.

[Guest Paul]

Please stop it Paul.  You know damn well that Paszkiewicz's size has nothing to do with this.  Or are you now saying that Matt was in physical danger from Paszkiewicz and Somma.

Paszkiewicz was an easy target.  One that Matt has been looking for for quite some awhile.

And I never said he didn't play this right.  By Matt not going to the media right away and you not demanding to be in the meeting with Paszkiewicz and Somma you played this perfectly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stop what, telling the truth, since it's not what you want to hear? I issued you an open invitation to lay me flat and you don't have a single thing to say except to repeat the lie, yet again, that Matthew was after Paszkiewicz. That is absolutely false.

As for intimidation, size does matter whether there is any real threat of physical violence or not. Ask any psychologist or for that matter nearly any woman. Hillary Clinton's first senatorial opponent sealed his own doom just by approaching her physically during a debate. Or ask Chris Wallace, who got hammered verbally by Bill Clinton during the famous interview a few months ago. Wallace, a professional journalist of longstanding (if anyone from Fox can still be called a professional) specifically described how intimidated he was by Clinton's presence, Clinton being much larger than he. Or look at the famous photograph of Lyndon Johnson towering over a much smaller senator verbally twisting his arm; or the photograph of Johnson melting Bill Moyers, who was then on his staff, with a withering look. Johnson was a master at using his size, and he did, even though no one really thought LBJ was going to hit them. Superior size takes us right back to our evolutionary past and to some very basic survival instincts that don't disappear just because we know intellectually that we're not really in danger. And if you think for one second that Matthew wasn't aware of the physical dynamics in that room, think again. So yet again you don't know what you're talking about.

An intelligent, calm, objective and discerning person probably can infer something about my thoughts and feelings from what I write and how I write it. But I issued you an invitation to be specific because what you WERE writing wasn't true. And as I suspected you avoided it completely because you don't have a single thing to say. And now everyone knows because you just proved it.

[Strife767]

Please stop it Paul.  You know damn well that Paszkiewicz's size has nothing to do with this.  Or are you now saying that Matt was in physical danger from Paszkiewicz and Somma.

One can be intimidated by a physically larger person, even if they don't feel physically threatened.

Paszkiewicz was an easy target.  One that Matt has been looking for for quite some awhile.

What makes you think Matt was looking for Paszkiewicz (or "an easy target"--the wording is a little ambiguous) for an extended period of time?

[Strife767]

I didn't say the teacher wasn't wrong.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Okay. It's hard (to put it lightly) to keep track of all you "Guests." Faceless crowd and all that.

[WilliamK]

Please stop it Paul.  You know damn well that Paszkiewicz's size has nothing to do with this.  Or are you now saying that Matt was in physical danger from Paszkiewicz and Somma.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course not. He's saying that to be a smallish kid confronting a larger and stronger adult is intimidating. No actual (or even imagined) physical threat is necessary for this to have a psychological effect. This, in itself, is not the result of any wrongdoing on the part of Paszkiewicz or Somma. But still it serves as one example of the courage that Matt has demonstrated throughout this situation.

Even if you don't agree with Matthew's cause, why can't you at least acknowledge his courage in pursuing it? Are you so desperate to vilify your perceived enemy that you've lost your capacity for honesty and rational thought? Can you not acknowledge that someone who pursues a cause that you detest can still have genuine courage, noble motivations, and honorable actions?

Where's the dishonor that you're so desperate to prove? Was Paszkiewicz accused of anything other than what he did, in fact, do? Were Paszkiewicz and the school board not given ample opportunity to take appropriate action of their own accord well before any of this went public? Were they not then given additional opportunity to act before going public with the recording from the meeting? Was there any demand for action that would end or permanently harm Paszkiewicz' career?

[Bern]

Paszkiewicz was an easy target.  One that Matt has been looking for for quite some awhile.

And I never said he didn't play this right.  By Matt not going to the media right away and you not demanding to be in the meeting with Paszkiewicz and Somma you played this perfectly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A teacher being a students easy target? Come of it.

I can see that Paul and Matthew will never win any argument with your type. If they went to media right away they would have been accused of fomenting outside trouble instead of trying to work it within the school.

But they did try to work it internally. So instead you are accuse them of "playing it perfectly" in a manipulative manner.

They did not play anything. They were willing to work this out internally and the school administration simply had to resolve the issue in a firm and legal way when it was brought it up. The issue would have been resolved without going outside of the school and we would not talking about it now.

[Guest Guest]

Okay. It's hard (to put it lightly) to keep track of all you "Guests." Faceless crowd and all that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where is the face of Strife? Show to me, please.

[Guest Guest]

I agree Paul. I find it amusing how many of those who mock Matt do so while remaining anonymous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't forget to include those who support him.