Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Unknown

KHS Teacher Controversy

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest
Yes, that you for that well thought out intelligent argument.  I guess that's all I have to say.

That's, or should I say thanks, is all you should say. Please don't "say" anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Thank goodness we have Matt LaClair, Jim Lippard, and AV standing up for our children's Constitutional Rights since the kids are "not very bright".

yeah...we really need students who want to play "lawyers" to defend ourselves! Give me a break! Matthew LaClair is an idiot and not very bright ,I should say. I feel that a lot of people here have no idea what is going on in Kearny, but give their opinion anyway.

Like the guy who spells it Kearney! Go write about North Arlingtun or Harrisun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Marshall Moseley

Well I find it telling that you did not include your name. I think the youth in question is brave. I think that church and state should be separate, and I think this teacher is the worst kind of idealogue -- one who thinks lies and stealth and bullying the young are acceptable because they achieve his ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
I'm going to challenge you to EXPLAIN the separation of church and state as defined in the Constiitution.

You forgot to also request the appropriate quotes and sources Loki.... this should be GOOD :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest aflyonthewall
I'm going to challenge you to EXPLAIN the separation of church and state as defined in the Constiitution.

Right!! Cause we all know that a teacher preaching Evangelical Christianity in a history class isn't wrong!

What's wrong with an agent of the state (a public school teacher) promoting one religious view to the exclusion of all others...now, while i'm on the topic, I'm going to go teach my kids why there is no god and religious people are idiots and invented gods.

Yeah!! The separation of church and state is a myth...or something. :rolleyes:

Gimme that ol' time religion,

Gimme that ol' time religion,

Gimme that ol' time religion,

In my history class!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Thank goodness we have Matt LaClair, Jim Lippard, and AV standing up for our children's Constitutional Rights since the kids are "not very bright".

I realize it's hard to be a standout student in such a large high school, but this really is an all time low.

Well than maybe YOU, LaClair, Lippard, And AV can start your own "Constitutional Rights Advocates" club and not let any of us "Kearny/Jersey City/Newark uneducated low-lives in! Just be careful LaClair doesn't bring his tape recorder, you may get trapped in a conversation HE STARTS and end up in the news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Thank goodness we have Matt LaClair, Jim Lippard, and AV standing up for our children's Constitutional Rights since the kids are "not very bright".

yeah...we really need students who want to play "lawyers" to defend ourselves! Give me a break! Matthew LaClair is an idiot and not very bright ,I should say. I feel that a lot of people here have no idea what is going on in Kearny, but give their opinion anyway. Get a life!!! go find something better to do, go listen to the records of the "bright" LaClair again and again and again...maybe you will learn something useful from Mr. Paszkiewicz....Once again, Matthew is an idiot, he needs to grow up and stop trying to get so many attention from people. He wanted to play the hero, but he is not doing a good job! Sorry Matt, try again next year!

And why are you on this site, have nothing better to do I'd suppose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hoser

Reading these posts, it really shows how f**ed up some of you are. While Matthew LaClair made David Paszkiewicz look bad, most of you make the whole Kearny community look bad.

Kudos to Matthew LaClair for standing up!

And if the teacher was setup as many of you say, that reflects poorly on him. A teacher with 10+ years experience being setup by a 16 year old student. Thats great.

By the way, you should read:

15-year old understands patriotism?

From Canada, with love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Doug Johnson
What is being done with this "student" for embarrassing his teacher, his school and his town?

Sorry the student is not the embarrassment, your beloved teacher/preacher is.

I can't believe there is so many wackos that support this lier.

The Eighth Commandment. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

He obviously denied the statements he made in class. Therefor he is a sinner. Lucky for the "student" he recorded the classes.

And on recording classes... It is a common practice. I am dyslexic and recorded almost all of my classes. Teachers are well aware that their lectures are recorded. It is not a crime or entrapment. Get over it. The teacher was out of line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jim

OMG... after reading these resonses I would say that pretty much all of the students in this school are in trouble.... the spelling mistakes, the grammar mistakes, the poor construction of thoughts..... not to mention the complete lack of ability to argue a point....

BTW... the adult responses don't seem to fare any better.... just sad :rolleyes:

Maybe the teachers should stick to teaching their subjects.... at least the community memebers would be able to write.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
OMG... after reading these resonses I would say that pretty much all of the students in this school are in trouble.... the spelling mistakes, the grammar mistakes, the poor construction of thoughts..... not to mention the complete lack of ability to argue a point....

BTW... the adult responses don't seem to fare any better.... just sad  :rolleyes:

Maybe the teachers should stick to teaching their subjects.... at least the community memebers would be able to write.

Jim............if you are writing about spelling you should check your own writing. Resonses? Memebers? Who's in trouble? Give us all a break! At least we got a good laugh out of your response!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michele 1984 KHS Grad

It does not matter whether any of you like this teacher or the student; the teacher is wrong. Your outrage should be directed at the wasting of precious school time discussing Jesus instead of history. Attacking the 16 year-old who taped this nonsense is simply an attempt to divert the issue at hand.

Which History class was this? I'm assuming 2nd year--what is the curriculum for that class? I'm sure it does not include anyone's personal religious beliefs. The only appropriate religious discussion in a freshman or sophomore history class would include discussion about the Puritans' beliefs as they relate to why those settlers left England; possibly, it would be appropriate to discuss religion in regard to the settling of the Western U.S. (the Mormon "exodus"); and, it would be OK if discussing social issues and change as religion had a lot to do with anti-poverty movements, civil rights, child labor, etc. From the transcripts I read, this was not at all what this teacher was lecturing about in this class. He was discussing his personal, religious beliefs--absolutely inappropriate in a public school's history class!

And, for all you "Christians" posting attacks on a 16 year-old: aren't you angry that this supposed "Christian" teacher, when questioned about his lectures, lied? I don't remember reading anything about Jesus condoning lying--maybe my version of the New Testament is different than the one this teacher reads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Loki
Right!!  Cause we all know that a teacher preaching Evangelical Christianity in a history class isn't wrong!

What's wrong with an agent of the state (a public school teacher) promoting one religious view to the exclusion of all others...now, while i'm on the topic, I'm going to go teach my kids why there is no god and religious people are idiots and invented gods.

Yeah!!  The separation of church and state is a myth...or something.  :rolleyes:

Gimme that ol' time religion,

Gimme that ol' time religion,

Gimme that ol' time religion,

In my history class!

You have the right to teach your children whatever religion/non-religion you desire, that is what the separation of church and state IS about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
I'm going to challenge you to EXPLAIN the separation of church and state as defined in the Constiitution.

In this context, the explanation is as follows:

The teacher is the authority figure in the classroom, and the state's representative. As such, he may not express his opinions on religious beliefs, because when he does so he speaks with the authority of the state, even if he makes it clear that he is only expressing his opinion. To see this more clearly if you are a Christian, imagine that the teacher was a Muslim cleric. Would you be so willing to defend him if he told the class that anyone who does not follow Allah and believe in the Koran "belongs in hell?" Very likely you would feel that he was using his position of authority to force his views on you, and what an agressive and insulting statement that is! Think about what he is saying. Even in a case where he asks "is it OK with you if I proselytize my religion," how many students would have the courage to tell him no? As the authority figure he has power, including power over students' grades. In a country founded on religious freedom for everyone, one person being offended or intimidated is too many. That is why the legal rule is absolute: he may not do it even if the class "consents."

Does this infringe on his rights? Absolutely not. He is free to express his religious opinions outside his function as a public school teacher. In that capacity, he represents the public. He took this job by choice, and he must abide by the law. And there's no question he knows the law, because he complained about it, and then broke it. In his capacity as a public school teacher, he must be completely neutral on religious matters.

Does it deprive the students of anything? In Paszkiewicz's case, while some may agree with his rants, his methods amount to intellectual bullying. His rants did more harm than good. Though he sometimes allows students to express contrary views within the context of Christianity, he asserts with dogmatic certitude that Christianity is the word of God. So any student who does not confirm to what he thinks is Christianity is shut down. Listen very carefully to the recordings, and you will hear this. It is completely impermissible under our Constitution, and completely contrary to the principle of religious freedom for all.

On matters of science, Paszkiewicz is abysmally ignorant. The big bang, for example. He dismisses it with the "argument" that nothing cannot explode and become something. This is a complete mischaracterization of the theory. The big bang holds that extremely dense matter exploded, not that "nothing exploded." Then he compares the big bang to an exploding firecracker, arguing that explosions do not result in order. Here, he ignores the fact that a firecracker does not result in the formation of bodies massive enough to have a gravitational pull. He completely ignores the fact that the scientific community all over the world accepts the big bang as the most likely explanation we have for the formation of the universe. And on what basis? What does he know about science? Obviously, almost nothing. This is not education. Just the opposite, it is the promotion of ignorance and misinformation, one the worst things a teacher can do.

Instead of teaching his students, Paszkiewicz reinforced some of the worst and most dangerous biases in our culture. That goes beyond your question, but I do think it is important.

I am Matt's dad. As you may now know, I am an attorney practicing for 29 years. I welcome all questions posed in a respectful manner by people who are actually willing to hear and evaluate the answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
I agree, the student should be suspended. People should also email Superintendent Mooney & Pricipal Somma, and board members to show support. I also would like to know how the parents of the other kids in the classroom feel about their kids voices and comments being on the internet!

There is no basis to suspend the student. The recordings do not violate any law or regulation. The school cannot suspend someone without a violation, and the student did not violate anything.

As for the recordings being available on the internet:

1. The students were already making their comments in a class of 25 or more students, so they are hardly private to begin with.

2. None of the students has anything to be ashamed of for what they said.

3. No one would be able to identify the students who did not already know them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
If you are from Kearny then by now you have heard a story that has been blown WAY OUT OF PROPORTION.

A student of KHS, one Matthew LaClair has gone to the newspaper stating that a teacher has been forcing his religious views in is history class.

Now I am all for having freedom of speech, but I also believe every subject has a place and time for discussion; and religion in a history class is not that place.

HOWEVER!!!! This 16 year old CHILD, is nothing more than an attention seeking, immature person, who is also been known to "previously garnered attention for protesting Bush administration activities by refusing to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance" (the lippar blog) I will include this website at the end of my rant!

This kid thinks he is so self rightcious and claims he “was requesting an apology and correction of false and anti-scientific statements" (the lippard blog).

If you listen to the audio (which I will also supply the site to) you can clearly hear that Laclair PROVOKED the conversation, and you can hear that the teacher had responded QUITE APPROPRIATELY:

One example being:

Matthew: isn't the whole point of public schools is so that you can separate personal beliefs from teachers and administrators from non religious teachings during school, like school prayer and all that.

teacher: the purpose of public school is to provide free education for people that couldn't afford education. That’s the purpose of public school

Matthew: what would decide what religion should be taught in school, what would decide that?

teacher: no it's not about teaching, my point is it's not about teaching religion, these issues all come up in time, ( tape fades out) things get legislated and we talk in class

the public school shouldn't teach a religion but the scriptures aren't religion they are a foundation of the worlds religion, the world main religion any way.

religion is a set way of doing things

In the conversation above, taken my Matthew Laclair himself, i see no wrong doing by this teacher, i do however see constant and what seems to be "rehearsed" provoking of the topic.

I hope he is reading this right now, because I just have one question for him: What on earth was the need to go to the newspaper? Laclair stated that he had a meeting with the principle, teacher, and the head of the social studies department and at first they did not seem to believe him but then he pulled out the cd's.....which in itself violated this teachers right to privacy.

So again, my question, after laclair proved himself with the cd's why did he not wait for administrative action to take place? There was no need to go to the newspaper, and I think in doing so, this Matthew laclair just proves that he is a 16 year old high school student, and therefore has ALOT to learn before he goes off starting religious wars, and pledge of allegiance protest in the United States of America, a country that has always, and especially since 9/11 shown great pride in our ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!!!

ps: a little side note for everyone reading this who disagrees: stating your views on religion and "forcing your beliefs on someone" is two COMPLELTY DIFFERENT THINGS.

so I would like to say to everyone who agrees or disagrees, we are all here in this nation, in this community together, and my religion is Roman Catholic, so when I say GOD BLESS YOU, I’m not forcing my views, I’m using my faith to wish you health and happiness

GOD BLESS you all

PPS: if this offends anyone then tough, because I AM offended that a wonderful teacher is being persecuted by an unknowledgeable juvenile for merely stating what he believes in. Also that this kid is living in MY COUTNRY where my friends and family have fought to keep our freedom and he turns his back on our president and our flag.

lippard blog: http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/11/public...-class-you.html

Audio:

http://www.nj.com/cgi-bin/prxy/xmedia/nph-.../classaudio.mp3

Just on the subject of public education, Paszkiewicz is wrong about that, too. There are cases from the Supreme Court of the United States that hold the purposes of public education to include the inculcation of democratic values, among other things. On this subject, as on a great many subjects, Paszkiewicz is simply wrong. He may be an excellent teacher in many ways, but he will do himself and his students a great service by loosening up on his dogmatic views, and by recognizing that he is not the final authority on all things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
It does not matter whether any of you like this teacher or the student; the teacher is wrong.  Your outrage should be directed at the wasting of precious school time discussing Jesus instead of history.  Attacking the 16 year-old who taped this nonsense is simply an attempt to divert the issue at hand. 

Which History class was this?  I'm assuming 2nd year--what is the curriculum for that class?  I'm sure it does not include anyone's personal religious beliefs.  The only appropriate religious discussion in a freshman or sophomore history class would include discussion about the Puritans' beliefs as they relate to why those settlers left England; possibly, it would be appropriate to discuss religion in regard to the settling of the Western U.S. (the Mormon "exodus"); and, it would be OK if discussing social issues and change as religion had a lot to do with anti-poverty movements, civil rights, child labor, etc.  From the transcripts I read, this was not at all what this teacher was lecturing about in this class.  He was discussing his personal, religious beliefs--absolutely inappropriate in a public school's history class! 

And, for all you "Christians" posting attacks on a 16 year-old:  aren't you angry that this supposed "Christian" teacher, when questioned about his lectures, lied?  I don't remember reading anything about Jesus condoning lying--maybe my version of the New Testament is different than the one this teacher reads.

Michele, this was supposed to be level 1 US History, 1880-present. I am quite certain there were no dinosaurs aboard "Noah's ark" during that period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
If you are from Kearny then by now you have heard a story that has been blown WAY OUT OF PROPORTION.

A student of KHS, one Matthew LaClair has gone to the newspaper stating that a teacher has been forcing his religious views in is history class.

Now I am all for having freedom of speech, but I also believe every subject has a place and time for discussion; and religion in a history class is not that place.

HOWEVER!!!! This 16 year old CHILD, is nothing more than an attention seeking, immature person, who is also been known to "previously garnered attention for protesting Bush administration activities by refusing to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance" (the lippar blog) I will include this website at the end of my rant!

This kid thinks he is so self rightcious and claims he “was requesting an apology and correction of false and anti-scientific statements" (the lippard blog).

If you listen to the audio (which I will also supply the site to) you can clearly hear that Laclair PROVOKED the conversation, and you can hear that the teacher had responded QUITE APPROPRIATELY:

One example being:

Matthew: isn't the whole point of public schools is so that you can separate personal beliefs from teachers and administrators from non religious teachings during school, like school prayer and all that.

teacher: the purpose of public school is to provide free education for people that couldn't afford education. That’s the purpose of public school

Matthew: what would decide what religion should be taught in school, what would decide that?

teacher: no it's not about teaching, my point is it's not about teaching religion, these issues all come up in time, ( tape fades out) things get legislated and we talk in class

the public school shouldn't teach a religion but the scriptures aren't religion they are a foundation of the worlds religion, the world main religion any way.

religion is a set way of doing things

In the conversation above, taken my Matthew Laclair himself, i see no wrong doing by this teacher, i do however see constant and what seems to be "rehearsed" provoking of the topic.

I hope he is reading this right now, because I just have one question for him: What on earth was the need to go to the newspaper? Laclair stated that he had a meeting with the principle, teacher, and the head of the social studies department and at first they did not seem to believe him but then he pulled out the cd's.....which in itself violated this teachers right to privacy.

So again, my question, after laclair proved himself with the cd's why did he not wait for administrative action to take place? There was no need to go to the newspaper, and I think in doing so, this Matthew laclair just proves that he is a 16 year old high school student, and therefore has ALOT to learn before he goes off starting religious wars, and pledge of allegiance protest in the United States of America, a country that has always, and especially since 9/11 shown great pride in our ONE NATION UNDER GOD!!!!

ps: a little side note for everyone reading this who disagrees: stating your views on religion and "forcing your beliefs on someone" is two COMPLELTY DIFFERENT THINGS.

so I would like to say to everyone who agrees or disagrees, we are all here in this nation, in this community together, and my religion is Roman Catholic, so when I say GOD BLESS YOU, I’m not forcing my views, I’m using my faith to wish you health and happiness

GOD BLESS you all

PPS: if this offends anyone then tough, because I AM offended that a wonderful teacher is being persecuted by an unknowledgeable juvenile for merely stating what he believes in. Also that this kid is living in MY COUTNRY where my friends and family have fought to keep our freedom and he turns his back on our president and our flag.

lippard blog: http://lippard.blogspot.com/2006/11/public...-class-you.html

Audio:

http://www.nj.com/cgi-bin/prxy/xmedia/nph-.../classaudio.mp3

In dismissing evolution as "not scientific," Paszkiewicz undermined the Kearny High science curriculum, and established science that is accepted all over the world. Whether people like it or not, evolution is part of the science curriculum at Kearny High. Biblical fundamentalism is not. In promoting the latter over the former, Paszkiewicz stepped far outside his bounds.

Many people are suspicious about evolutionary theory, but the facts are these. It is accepted as true by the scientific community all over the world. Most biologists say you cannot even understand modern biology without understanding evolution. Many of the developments in modern medicine are as a result of evolutionary theory.

Evolutionary theory is based on millions of artifacts, mainly fossils, which have been dated using established methods applicable in every other field of science. Those fossils show a clear pattern of appearance of species over time. For example, there are no vertebrate fossils to be found in the vast time period in which there were only invertebrates. Those data are now confirmed to the letter by DNA analysis of the same millions of fossils. The pattern fits exactly with what appears to be the case with the naked eye: after scientists traced the most likely evolutionary patterns from the physical appearance of fossils, they then became able to verify the results with DNA analysis, which verified the theory to the letter. In addition, evolutionary theory makes accurate predictions. By using evolutionary theory, scientists have made advances in biology and medicine that would not be possible without the theory. So if we were going to reject this theory, we would also have to throw out all the advances in medicine that have resulted from it. I don't see even religious fundamentalists doing that.

There is also a common misunderstanding about what a "theory" is, a misunderstanding that Paszkiewicz took advantage of in class. A theory is not distinguished from a fact. A theory may be a fact. Gravity, for example, is both a fact and a theory. So is evolution of species. A theory is an organized explanation for a group or set of observed phenomena or facts, with sufficient data to support it. It is distinguished not from fact, but from a hypothesis, which is an organized explanation without sufficient supporting data to be called true. Both are indispensable to science.

Just as a general matter, and while no one expects everyone to become a scientist, some humility is in order here. Scientists spend their lives discovering things about the world and the universe. These discoveries have changed our lives. They made possible the technology that allows this very dialogue to occur. The people who would oppose this might stop and think whether they are really willing to throw that all out the window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
Sure he is...he's already free to refuse to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance...he's free to complain that American money states "IN GOD WE TRUST"  but he should not be free to secretly tape someone and then use it in the media. I'm not sure but I believe thats against the law. I hope he's feeling very good about himself. From what I hear, he's going to be pretty lonely. The kids at KHS think he is dead wrong.

He is willing to be lonely to do the right thing. It's called integrity. The teacher was wrong, and he proved it the only possible way. The other students weren't going to support him without hard evidence. They aren't even supporting him with the evidence.

Doing the right thing, even though your community and your peers may not agree. It's also called courage. I'll take that over the throngs of go-alongs seven days a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
I think it is pretty ironic that this kid has the nerve to fight against freedom of speech but loves to invoke his right to not have to stand and salute the flag at school. By the way, I think his attorney father should advise him that it is unlawful to record a conversation with someone unless they are advised of this.  Maybe Matthew should look in the mirror, reassess the situation and see that his High School is in full support of the teacher in this matter

As his father and an attorney, I advised him of the law, which is that recording the class was legal.

Moreover, your sense of irony is misplaced. A public school teacher is in a position of public trust. He may not espouse his religious beliefs in class, because in that setting he is not representing himself, but the state. He voluntarily chose to take a job teaching in a public school, and must abide by the law that applies. One aspect of that law is that he may not preach his religion there. You may not like it, but that is the law.

What others think of this is their business. However, Matthew has had the courage to do what he thought was right. You may not like it, but he has no trouble at all looking in the mirror. You might want to read what people outside of Kearny are saying.

Across the nation and around the world, he has won respect and admiration. Just give it some thought, and if you'd like to have a respectful and thoughtful dialogue, we are available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Paul
But again we go back to how little respect kids today have for America and what it stands for. I also blame the parents who tolerate this kind of behavior from their children. Wasn't this "child" taught why he should stand for the Pledge?? Short of an open apology from the student and his parents, he should be suspended at the least!  :lol:

What America stands for, as I understand it, is freedom. There is no freedom in being forced or coerced into singing a song or reciting a pledge. While these things have their place, the minute they become so firmly engrained that everyone just expects them to be done, they lose their meaning.

Speaking of the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain, Ronald Reagan once said "We never had to put up a wall to keep our people in." The beauty of a national anthem or pledge is that people sing or recite because they are free. Force us to do it, and the exercise loses all its meaning. The only places where such things are done are places like Nazi Germany.

Standing for the pledge today does nothing to help our troops or make our country safer. Declining to stand is a visible reminder that we are still free to dissent, and a caution to a nation that has recently given too much authority, without questioning, to one man. A majority, perhaps the vast majority of Americans may disagree, but when they cannot tolerate dissent, our freedom is in serious danger.

So I respectfully suggest that those who think they know everything there is to know about freedom think again about what it really means. No one is asking them not to stand and salute. However, the one who reminds us that we cannot be forced to do so provides a very valuable and important reminder. Do not presume to judge Matthew's motives when you do not understand them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
Jim............if you are writing about spelling you should check your own writing. Resonses? Memebers? Who's in trouble? Give us all a break! At least we got a good laugh out of your response!

I agree. Don't worry about our kids in KHS, they are going to do just fine. The list is long of Kearny High School graduates who have gone forward to achieve great things. Many of them have come back to their beloved Kearny, their home, and given their talents back to our community in the form of teachers, business people, doctors, lawyers, authors, playwrites, etc., etc. The grass is always greener on the other side!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest
In this context, the explanation is as follows:

The teacher is the authority figure in the classroom, and the state's representative. As such, he may not express his opinions on religious beliefs, because when he does so he speaks with the authority of the state, even if he makes it clear that he is only expressing his opinion. To see this more clearly if you are a Christian, imagine that the teacher was a Muslim cleric. Would you be so willing to defend him if he told the class that anyone who does not follow Allah and believe in the Koran "belongs in hell?" Very likely you would feel that he was using his position of authority to force his views on you, and what an agressive and insulting statement that is! Think about what he is saying. Even in a case where he asks "is it OK with you if I proselytize my religion," how many students would have the courage to tell him no? As the authority figure he has power, including power over students' grades. In a country founded on religious freedom for everyone, one person being offended or intimidated is too many. That is why the legal rule is absolute: he may not do it even if the class "consents."

Does this infringe on his rights? Absolutely not. He is free to express his religious opinions outside his function as a public school teacher. In that capacity, he represents the public. He took this job by choice, and he must abide by the law. And there's no question he knows the law, because he complained about it, and then broke it. In his capacity as a public school teacher, he must be completely neutral on religious matters.

Does it deprive the students of anything? In Paszkiewicz's case, while some may agree with his rants, his methods amount to intellectual bullying. His rants did more harm than good. Though he sometimes allows students to express contrary views within the context of Christianity, he asserts with dogmatic certitude that Christianity is the word of God. So any student who does not confirm to what he thinks is Christianity is shut down. Listen very carefully to the recordings, and you will hear this. It is completely impermissible under our Constitution, and completely contrary to the principle of religious freedom for all.

On matters of science, Paszkiewicz is abysmally ignorant. The big bang, for example. He dismisses it with the "argument" that nothing cannot explode and become something. This is a complete mischaracterization of the theory. The big bang holds that extremely dense matter exploded, not that "nothing exploded." Then he compares the big bang to an exploding firecracker, arguing that explosions do not result in order.  Here, he ignores the fact that a firecracker does not result in the formation of bodies massive enough to have a gravitational pull. He completely ignores the fact that the scientific community all over the world accepts the big bang as the most likely explanation we have for the formation of the universe. And on what basis? What does he know about science? Obviously, almost nothing. This is not education. Just the opposite, it is the promotion of ignorance and misinformation, one the worst things a teacher can do.

Instead of teaching his students, Paszkiewicz reinforced some of the worst and most dangerous biases in our culture. That goes beyond your question, but I do think it is important.

I am Matt's dad. As you may now know, I am an attorney practicing for 29 years. I welcome all questions posed in a respectful manner by people who are actually willing to hear and evaluate the answers.

Dear Matt's Dad, what are you doing to your son? You are making his school life a living hell. Do you think it's worth it for your son to not have friends in high school? Do you think it's worth it for your son to be looked at by anyone he comes in contact with to be suspicious of him? Anyone who comes within a few feet of your son is wary. Is that what you want for him? I understand the point you are trying to make, however it's YOUR point, not your son's. Whatever spills out of his mouth is you and your wife. He's only a kid, and within the last two years he has pushed buttons by not standing for the flag salute, by posting things on his locker and tape recording a class, fellow students and teacher without their knowledge. I truely believe this is abusive on your part. My kids were in Mr. P's class too. And as I told them from about the 7th grade on, you are going to meet all kinds of people in this world. You know what your own beliefs are, you know the person you are, let it go in one ear and out the other and be your own person. What is your son going to do when he has a boss that expresses things that your son doesn't agree with? Take the guy to court? Probably. He'll be fighting his whole life.

I feel in my heart that you are using your son to expouse your own inadequecies. Just like the Dad who pushes his kid in football, baseball or soccer. Living what you wanted to do in your life, but didn't accomplish so you live it through your kids. Enough is enough already. Let your son be a kid and have some fun. I say all of this very sincerely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

This thread really disgusts me.

First of all, there is no law against recording something in a public classroom. So please stop beating that horse. Secondly, his saying or not saying the pledge has nothing whatsoever to do with the situation. The situation is simply this: a teacher was caught preaching in a public classroom. That is against the law. Period. No argument, no reply. That is the situation. And why is this illegal? Because to millions of students who are Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, Agnostic, Hindu, Shinto, or whatever religion besides Christianity, to preach about the Bible and the Scriptures is a direct violation of their rights as a citizen. Mr. Paszkiewicz has every right to step outside of his classroom environment and tell anyone who is willing to listen about his beliefs. But the second he steps in the classroom, he has to check his beliefs at the door. He has a responsibility to the students and their parents to give them an education, not tell them how they should think. He failed, and should be subjected to the rules set for these situations, not let off just because a group of parents agrees with what he preaches.

So to all the "CONCERNED AMERICANS" and "Proud Americans" who support Mr. Paszkiewicz, let me ask you this: If he was an atheist, preaching atheism and proving to his students using scientific fact that the Bible is a work of fiction, would you be of with him teaching still?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...