A message of support for Matthew LaClair

[Guest Lauren Dempsey]

Matthew,

You and your parents are very brave to take such a stand in the ultra-religious atmosphere of today. I hope my children will be as strong in their convictions as you are when they are sixteen (or sixty!). Thank you for not being afraid to voice your opinion. Shame on that teacher and the school. Kearny, what is your problem???

[Guest lor]

As a teacher, lawyer, & Jew, I applaud your actions. You should remind your "teacher" that the Protestants drove the Catholics out of the public schools in the 1800's by the same type of activity; that students of minority religions have no choice but to sit there because of the manditory attendance laws and that he should put himself in their shoes.

I hope that your father follows through with a law suit in federal coirt.  The teacher and the school district need to be reminded that freedom of religion is not freedom to express your ideas about religion when the audience is compeled to sit there.  In that case, freedom of religion is being free of religion - anyone's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As a teacher, lawyer you should be able to spell court correctly

[Stixx3969]

As a teacher, lawyer you should be able to spell court correctly

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"U" is right next to "I"

It's just a minor typo, asshole!

[Strife767]

As a teacher, lawyer you should be able to spell court correctly

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, come on, seriously. This is very immature. Look on the keyboard and tell me how many keys 'i' is away from 'u.' I'll wait...

...yeah, it's one. Therefore, this is obviously a typo and not an inability to spell the word correctly.

[Guest Mark]

Matthew,

Way to go, standing up for the constitution and the religious liberty of those whose views your teacher is trampling over.

Excellent idea taping the lectures.

Be patient - justice is on your side, and it will be done, just as it was when the Dover, Pennsylvania school board was all voted out of office for their idiotic support of teaching creationism. Raise the stakes - take it to the school board. Nail these administrators to the wall and make it clear that the longer they support this teacher the higher the price they will pay.

Best of luck,

Mark

[Guest Jean]

Well done, Matthew. Stand strong. You have a lot of support out here. I'm in shock -- ironically, a chronic condition these days -- that your action is even necessary. It is truly an absurd state of affairs that this cultist bully is hammering at young minds. I live in the Bible Belt and would like to think Northeasterners haven't lost their minds as well.

Thank you.

[Guest Guest]

:

Matthew, you are an inspiration.  The more you learn about the world, past and present, the more you will see how important your actions were.  Now that you've been written about in the New York Times, people EVERYWHERE know how you bravely have put yourself forward defending the freedom of religion, the separation of church and state.  You have a great deal of support ALL OVER THE WORLD.  It's hard to see past the small-minded people around you, who criticize you, make you feel unwanted.  (Come to think of it, Jesus said a prophet is never welcome in his hometown.)  Keep your chin up, and remember, many, many people are behind you.  You're awesome!

Dan Urbach, MD

Portland, Oregon

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Some inspiration! Lets all be sneaky and record what every one is saying.

I would not let my child 500 feet near Matthew.

[Guest Guest]

:

  Some inspiration!  Lets all be sneaky and record what every one is saying.

I would not let my child 500 feet near Matthew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you don't believe government should be open or accountable. Got it. Thanks for being a patriotic citizen, and enjoy your complimentary blinders.

[Strife767]

:

  Some inspiration!  Lets all be sneaky and record what every one is saying. I would not let my child 500 feet near Matthew.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I feel sorry for you and your child. I hope your ignorance isn't hereditary.

[Guest Guest]

I wish people would stop bashing Christians. Not all Christians are hardcore, Nazi-like robots....in fact, most Christians I know are far from it and are tolerant of others from all walks of life (which is how it should be). While I think Laclair had a point in the beginning and that Paszkiewicz went TOO far in his damnations to hell (Only God can condemn people to hell, no human is capable of that!), I don't think that he should be fired. He is otherwise not a bad person and does not deserve to lose his job over this. I think that the assembly idea is good in order to enlighten high school students, however the fact that they are dragging on about this for so long is getting on my nerves...I swear if I open another damn newspaper and hear about it again I'm gonna flip! It's in the process of getting taken care of; no need to waste more of our middle-class taxpayers' money to go to lawsuit costs....Kearny schools barely have enough money as it is because people keep voting down the budget! So YOU choose: the schools collapsing or letting this thing get solved the way it's been headed! You know they're never going to fix our schools...the scaffolding is practically permanent...

P.S. If you're going to create such a controversy in your town, you should expect to get the butt end of criticisms. There ARE two sides to this argument after all, and if you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen. I know if I had done something similar, I wouldn't be surprised to get threats from people, they've got just as much of a right to be pissed at you as you do to be pissed at your teacher. It's not like you're untouchable either.....

[WilliamK]

P.S.  If you're going to create such a controversy in your town, you should expect to get the butt end of criticisms.  There ARE two sides to this argument after all, and if you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There are two sides to EVERY argument. That does not mean they're equally valid.

I know if I had done something similar, I wouldn't be surprised to get threats from people, they've got just as much of a right to be pissed at you as you do to be pissed at your teacher.  It's not like you're untouchable either.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If by "right" you mean "justification", then no, they don't. The teacher is the wrongdoer here, not the ones who caught him at it. There is no valid justification for being as pissed at the LaClairs as at the teacher (and administration and school board).

And if by "right" you actually mean "right" (as in "inalienable rights", not as in "right vs. wrong", "turn right at the stop sign" or "right wing"), well, a right to get pissed does not equal a right to threaten. The ones making the threats are wrong. Not the ones targeted by them.

[Strife767]

I wish people would stop bashing Christians.  Not all Christians are hardcore, Nazi-like robots....in fact, most Christians I know are far from it and are tolerant of others from all walks of life (which is how it should be).

Unfortunately, it has been shown to me that the concentration of "bad Christians" is a lot higher in Kearny than originally anticipating. It is quite distressing...

While I think Laclair had a point in the beginning and that Paszkiewicz went TOO far in his damnations to hell (Only God can condemn people to hell, no human is capable of that!), I don't think that he should be fired.  He is otherwise not a bad person and does not deserve to lose his job over this.

Have you considered these things, though?

1. He has not defended Matthew in any way--a decent Christian would speak out against the harassment up to and including a death threat (!) in his name.

2. He has made several blatantly false statements about science that are also clearly inspired by his dogma.

3. He has shown a lack of fundamental knowledge of US history by misquoting founding fathers and displaying a lack of understanding of the ideas behind the foundation of this country, something that no respectable US history teacher would ever be caught dead doing.

4. In spite of the above, he is completely remorseless. Not only will he not take back anything he said, but he still insists that he did NO preaching in class, and paints Matthew as the 'bad guy' for ever bringing his behavior to the attention of the authorities (and then, when they did not react satisfactorily, the media).

Paszkiewicz is dishonest, incompetent, and unwilling to hold himself accountable for ANY of his mistakes, from factual errors to proselytizing. Does a man like this deserve to keep his job?

[Guest Steve_C]

I wish people would stop bashing Christians.  Not all Christians are hardcore, Nazi-like robots....in fact, most Christians I know are far from it and are tolerant of others from all walks of life (which is how it should be).  While I think Laclair had a point in the beginning and that Paszkiewicz went TOO far in his damnations to hell (Only God can condemn people to hell, no human is capable of that!), I don't think that he should be fired.  He is otherwise not a bad person and does not deserve to lose his job over this.  I think that the assembly idea is good in order to enlighten high school students, however the fact that they are dragging on about this for so long is getting on my nerves...I swear if I open another damn newspaper and hear about it again I'm gonna flip!  It's in the process of getting taken care of; no need to waste more of our middle-class taxpayers' money to go to lawsuit costs....Kearny schools barely have enough money as it is because people keep voting down the budget!  So YOU choose: the schools collapsing or letting this thing get solved the way it's been headed!  You know they're never going to fix our schools...the scaffolding is practically permanent...

P.S.  If you're going to create such a controversy in your town, you should expect to get the butt end of criticisms.  There ARE two sides to this argument after all, and if you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen.  I know if I had done something similar, I wouldn't be surprised to get threats from people, they've got just as much of a right to be pissed at you as you do to be pissed at your teacher.  It's not like you're untouchable either.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Christian teachers who preach in public school are the problem. Not the students and parents that want their kids to be taught useful curriculum.

Criticizing in not bashing. Mr. P is a problem and deserves his ridicule. Dinosaurs on the Ark? Anyone who espouses that crap should be laughed at, mocked and made an example of. There's no place in schools for liars, frauds or deluded dimwits.

The reason this has dragged on is because the BOE wants to ignore the problem. Mr. P sends a muddled pointless letter to the paper which just reinforces his stance of "he did no wrong". Then they make it worse by transferring Mr. P's entire class. They refuse to deal with the situation.

There aren't two sides to the argument. Unless sit down and shut up is the otherside.

[Guest Daniella]

How can any of you sit here and applaud matt?

He doesn't need any applauding nor does he deserve it.

I read what he said about wanting just an apology well i have to say that I do disagree with him. If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself, That would have been being more of a man than he is supposedly being now. Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not. Matt is indeed eating up all of the exposure he is recieving , and quite frankly i think that it's making his head bigger than it needs to be. It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion. Both of tthem were indeed wrong, Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me. However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did.

-->There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public? There are far worse things going on schools than a man stating an opinion, an opinion that would of been allowed to be opposed to. Columbine for example was far worse, which deserved to be made public, should this have been added to the list. Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it. There other things in the world that need more attention than this.

[an American in Texas]

Daniella: "If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself,"

You are mistaken. Matthew met with the teacher, principal, and department head before anything was published about the issue.

Daniella: "Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me."

The courts of the United States do not agree with you here. Nor, for the record, do I, and I am a devout Christian. Court rulings have made it clear that proselytizing in the classroom is not defensible.

Daniella: "It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion."

I don't agree. This is a BIG DEAL, Daniella. It touches issues that are foundational for our country.

Daniella: "However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did."

Again, I don't agree. The teacher brought up the issue of religion, and his personal religious beliefs, on his own. Matthew's questions asked him to elaborate on points he had already brought up.

Daniella: "There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public?"

Yes, I believe it did, because once again this is a BIG DEAL. Any humilitation Paszkiewicz now experiences is of his own making. Mistake #1 was preaching in the classroom. Mistake #2 was lying about it. Mistake #3 is continuing to insist he's done nothing wrong.

Daniella: "Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it."

More extreme? In my opinion, it's Paszkiewicz who is extreme. The Laclairs look like models of moderation in comparison. In any case, extremism in defense of the Constitution is to my mind admirable.

Daniella: "There other things in the world that need more attention than this."

No doubt, but this is the issue at hand. And it's by no means a small issue in and of itself.

Daniella: "Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not."

Yes, it is. To expose yourself to threats, slander, personal criticism, and ostracization in defense of a principle is indeed courageous.

I understand that you don't like the attention this brouhaha has brought to your town and your school. While your resentment is perhaps natural, it would be good if you reflected on WHY people outside your town are so interested in the issue.

It's because we think this is an important case with national implications. It's because we wonder what would happen in our own schools if such a situation occurred.

And, truth be told, it's because some of us who are older are so delighted to see a young person with courage and convictions.

Leigh Williams

Austin, Texas

[Guest Guest]

How can any of you sit here and applaud matt?

He doesn't need any applauding nor does he deserve it.

I read what he said about wanting just an apology well i have to say that I do disagree with him. If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself, That would have been being more of a man than he is supposedly being now. Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not. Matt is indeed eating up all of the exposure he is recieving , and quite frankly i think that it's making his head bigger than it needs to be. It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion. Both of tthem were indeed wrong, Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me. However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did.

    -->There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public? There are far worse things going on schools than a man stating an opinion, an opinion that would of been allowed to be opposed to. Columbine for example was far worse, which deserved to be made public, should this have been added to the list. Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it. There other things in the world that need more attention than this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe on your next post you could use large red text?

[Guest Guest]

Thank you Matthew!

Hey Guys keep talking about David Paszkiewicz...this way you are spreading the gospel! Thank you so much!

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 03:35 PM

Well, I don't think you got the point! It is ironic how Matthew LaClair wanted to shut Paszkiewicz's mouth, so he won't talk about christianity, however, the plan of salvation is now on every newspaper and tv channel..of course some people will read it and ignore it, but some people will read it and will meditate on it. Instead of making Paszkiewicz shut up, LaClair spread the plan of salvation (John 3:16)on every newspaper...just read the Jersey Journal, it is there...This is the dream of all christians and Paszkiewicz didn't have to do anything, Matthew did all the work....

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 11:38 PM

You right, he is a hero

[WilliamK]

[...]If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself, [...]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The demand for an apology and for having someone speak to the class to set straight some of Mr. P's misstatements, was made at the meeting between Matthew, Mr. P, and the school principal. That was months before any of this was made public.

[Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo]

Daniella:  "If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself,"

You are mistaken.  Matthew met with the teacher, principal, and department head before anything was published about the issue.

Daniella:  "Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me."

The courts of the United States do not agree with you here.  Nor, for the record, do I, and I am a devout Christian.  Court rulings have made it clear that proselytizing in the classroom is not defensible. 

Daniella:  "It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion."

I don't agree.  This is a BIG DEAL, Daniella.  It touches issues that are foundational for our country. 

Daniella:  "However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did."

Again, I don't agree.  The teacher brought up the issue of religion, and his personal religious beliefs, on his own.  Matthew's questions asked him to elaborate on points he had already brought up.

Daniella:  "There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public?"

Yes, I believe it did, because once again this is a BIG DEAL.  Any humilitation Paszkiewicz now experiences is of his own making.  Mistake #1 was preaching in the classroom.  Mistake #2 was lying about it.  Mistake #3 is continuing to insist he's done nothing wrong. 

Daniella:  "Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it."

More extreme?  In my opinion, it's Paszkiewicz who is extreme.  The Laclairs look like models of moderation in comparison.  In any case, extremism in defense of the Constitution is to my mind admirable.

Daniella:  "There other things in the world that need more attention than this."

No doubt, but this is the issue at hand.  And it's by no means a small issue in and of itself.

Daniella:  "Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not."

Yes, it is.  To expose yourself to threats, slander, personal criticism, and ostracization in defense of a principle is indeed courageous. 

I understand that you don't like the attention this brouhaha has brought to your town and your school.  While your resentment is perhaps natural, it would be good if you reflected on WHY people outside your town are so interested in the issue. 

It's because we think this is an important case with national implications.  It's because we wonder what would happen in our own schools if such a situation occurred.

And, truth be told, it's because some of us who are older are so delighted to see a young person with courage and convictions. 

Leigh Williams

Austin, Texas

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dear Leigh,

Your post was refreshing. It is nice to hear from a rational Christian who understands that this issue is a BIG DEAL yet not an attack on Christianity. Most so-called Christians who post here want us to belive that somehow this is an attack on Christianity itself. Sadly I don't doubt for a minute that they actually do believe that to be the case. You know whats interesting to me is that although I have seen the question posted numerous times, none of these people have ever given a response as to what if Mr. P was Muslim, Jewish, Wiccan, etc. If they have answered it I havn't seen it. I wish I would have known more Christians like you because most who tend to post here are the same type we have here at home and why I left the church.

[Strife767]

How can any of you sit here and applaud matt?

(annoying super-large size and color tags removed )

It's actually pretty easy. A fundamental working knowledge of the Constitution makes the decision quite easy, imho.

He doesn't need any applauding nor does he deserve it.

The question is, will your reason why not be anything not already unsuccessfully tried before?

I read what he said about wanting [i]just an apology[/i] well i have to say that I do disagree with him. If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself,

He didn't. He had the meeting with Paszkiewicz and company long before the press was aware of the issue.

Man, factual errors already. This does not bode well...

That would have been being more of a man than he is supposedly being now. Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not.

You think there is no courage in being the one and only person willing to expose a preaching teacher, and to face all kinds of criticism, bullying, even a death threat, for his cause?

Matt is indeed eating up all of the exposure he is recieving , and quite frankly i think that it's making his head bigger than it needs to be.

Of course, what you "think" here is just your own assumption. Matthew hasn't shown any signs of "big head" as a result of the issue.

It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion.

Matthew and Paul have acted very slowly and deliberately, giving Paszkiewicz and the Board several chances to fix their mistakes. It is only in the absence of any real corrective action that they have taken the issue 'higher.' Paszkiewicz and the Board are leaving Matthew and Paul no other choice.

Both of tthem were indeed wrong, Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history

That's quite debatable, actually. Turns out there is no more evidence for a historical Jesus than there is for a historical Hercules.

Regardless, this is a tired, baseless argument. Even if Jesus was definitely a historical figure, there are some things you're missing:

1. The class is US History. The Biblical Jesus has nothing to do with US history.

2. Paszkiewicz did not speak of his religion in a historical context. I refer you to my signature for an example of the actual nature of his comments. To say that his religious comments were all part of a discussion of history is a blatant lie, plain and simple.

and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me. However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did.

Why not? This sounds like hinting at the "Matthew set him up" nonsense. Not only is it ridiculous to suggest that a teacher who's been teaching for 15 years could truly be 'baited' so easily by a high school junior, but it misses the point that _regardless_ of any question ANY student asks, Paszkiewicz is still accountable for what he says while on the job.

-->There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line.

All Matthew did was make public what Mr. Paszkiewicz himself said. Mr. P. humiliated himself--the recordings contained HIS WORDS, completely unembellished. Not only that, but if Mr. P. and/or the Board had nipped this thing in the bud, the media would have never been made aware of it at all. Their lack of action forced the LaClairs to seek justice through other avenues. They brought it on themselves--there's no two ways about it. It is fact that it was only after a staggering lack of action from both Mr. P. and the Board that the issue was taken to the media etc.

Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public?

No, it didn't. If only he had actually owned up to his mistake instead of taking every chance he had to make things right to go on a self-righteous tirade, misquoting founding fathers and generally making himself look not only like a buffoon, but displaying astonishing incompetence in the actual subject matter he's supposed to be teaching. If he had done that, the public would have never known about any of this. It is ultimately Mr. P.'s fault that this issue ever reached the media.

There are far worse things going on schools than a man stating an opinion,

And preaching one's religion in a public school classroom is one of them.

an opinion that would of been allowed to be opposed to.

Public schools are Constitutionally bound to be religiously neutral. End of story. It doesn't matter whether X number of students agree or disagree with the teacher's beliefs--they do not have the authority to give their teacher permission to breach the Constitution.

Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it.

No one forced him to talk about who does and doesn't belong in a location he defines as one of eternal suffering. This is a ridiculous suggestion, and it only becomes moreso the more it's attempted.

There other things in the world that need more attention than this.

Ah, the "this isn't the most important thing in the entire world, therefore we should all completely ignore it" argument. How moronic.

[Strife767]

Thank you Matthew!

Hey Guys keep talking about David Paszkiewicz...this way you are spreading the gospel! Thank you so much!

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 03:35 PM

Well, I don't think you got the point! It is ironic how Matthew LaClair wanted to shut Paszkiewicz's mouth, so he won't talk about christianity, however, the plan of salvation is now on every newspaper and tv channel..of course some people will read it and ignore it, but some people will read it and will meditate on it. Instead of making Paszkiewicz shut up, LaClair spread the plan of salvation (John 3:16)on every newspaper...just read the Jersey Journal, it is there...This is the dream of all christians and Paszkiewicz didn't have to do anything, Matthew did all the work....

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 11:38 PM

You right, he is a hero

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOL, talk about denial. Every rational Christian agrees that people like Mr. P. do nothing but hurt Christianity's reputation, and I've seen several instances of Christians getting upset at Paszkiewicz and/or some of his nuttier apologists on this board for their actions.

I would say "nice try at the reverse psychology," except that it was so incredibly transparent that no, it was a terrible try. Better luck next time.

[an American in Texas]

Yet Another Anonymous Guest (YAUG) said: "Well, I don't think you got the point! It is ironic how Matthew LaClair wanted to shut Paszkiewicz's mouth, so he won't talk about christianity, however, the plan of salvation is now on every newspaper and tv channel..of course some people will read it and ignore it, but some people will read it and will meditate on it. "

In what wild dream do you imagine that Paszkiewicz's presentation of the plan of salvation will lead anyone to Christ? It's far, far more likely that anyone who reads of his exploits will conclude that he's typical of "Christians" -- hypocritical, bigoted, and just plain loony.

The "meditation" his exploits are likely to induce is decidely UNLIKELY to lead anyone to conclude that Jesus is worthy of serious consideration. Quite the opposite, in fact.

He has done an enormous disservice to the cause of Christ. His actions have brought the name of the Lord into disrepute. How very sad, because I'm sure that was not his intention.

Leigh Williams

Austin, Texas

[Guest Meg]

How can any of you sit here and applaud matt?

He doesn't need any applauding nor does he deserve it.

I read what he said about wanting just an apology well i have to say that I do disagree with him. If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself, That would have been being more of a man than he is supposedly being now. Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not. Matt is indeed eating up all of the exposure he is recieving , and quite frankly i think that it's making his head bigger than it needs to be. It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion. Both of tthem were indeed wrong, Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me. However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did.

    -->There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public? There are far worse things going on schools than a man stating an opinion, an opinion that would of been allowed to be opposed to. Columbine for example was far worse, which deserved to be made public, should this have been added to the list. Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it. There other things in the world that need more attention than this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Daniella,

I think you are completely correct. This issue was blown way out of proportion. Matthew LaClair as well as Mr. P were wrong, but Matthew took it farther than needed. Situations like this probaby go on more often than told and I'm sure not every kid that disagrees birngs it to the press and secretly records the class. As a teacher it is Mr. P's job to answer the questions that students ask. Nobody is forceing Matt to agree and no one held him back from debating what was said. Matt is wrong and this issue had no reason to go public. -- Meg

[Guest bewildered]

Thank you Matthew!

Hey Guys keep talking about David Paszkiewicz...this way you are spreading the gospel! Thank you so much!

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 03:35 PM

Well, I don't think you got the point! It is ironic how Matthew LaClair wanted to shut Paszkiewicz's mouth, so he won't talk about christianity, however, the plan of salvation is now on every newspaper and tv channel..of course some people will read it and ignore it, but some people will read it and will meditate on it. Instead of making Paszkiewicz shut up, LaClair spread the plan of salvation (John 3:16)on every newspaper...just read the Jersey Journal, it is there...This is the dream of all christians and Paszkiewicz didn't have to do anything, Matthew did all the work....

Posted by: ??? | November 17, 2006 11:38 PM

You right, he is a hero

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Accept Jesus or you will burn in hell forever" is hardly an irresistable message. It ignores the messages of Jesus to love and accept everyone.

By breaking the law and by denying that he said what he said only shows that fundie christians will do anything to get their sick message out to people.

[Guest Guest]

How can any of you sit here and applaud matt?

He doesn't need any applauding nor does he deserve it.

I read what he said about wanting just an apology well i have to say that I do disagree with him. If all he wanted was just an apology then why would he bring this issue to the press before bringing it to the teacher himself, That would have been being more of a man than he is supposedly being now. Now is it all that courageous? No, in all reality it's not. Matt is indeed eating up all of the exposure he is recieving , and quite frankly i think that it's making his head bigger than it needs to be.

Just how did you come to this conclusion?

It's wrong what he is doing, him and his family is blowing this whole situation out of proportion. Both of tthem were indeed wrong, Mr Paszkiewicz should have been more careful with crossing that line of religion and school, but let's be realistic here people, Jesus christ is apart of history and is in our history books so obviuosly that line isnt pretty thick if you ask me.

"Jesus Christ is apart of history"?  Is this a freudian slip or just more of your bad grammar.?

However, Mathew shouldn't of provoked such a touchy subject, and from the tapings it sure sounds like he did.

    -->There is a big difference between standing up for what is right and public humiliation, and it is completely clear that Matt crossed that line. Mr Paszkiewicz is not a bad man, he made a mistake, but ask yourself did this have to be made public? There are far worse things going on schools than a man stating an opinion, an opinion that would of been allowed to be opposed to. Columbine for example was far worse, which deserved to be made public, should this have been added to the list. Mathew and his family are far extreme more than needed to be. He provoked the situation, and now everyone will have to pay for it. There other things in the world that need more attention than this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with Leigh. I guess defending the constitution doesn't mean much to Danielle.