Students Transfer in History Class

[Stixx3969]

     

So I guess you were there?  Its not preaching its teaching.  So now he is a wackjob?  So if every word you said was put under a microscope like this teacher is having done, you would be not last.  Ohh wait, working for the town you don't have to worry about mistakes, do you?

     

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You CAN'T PREACH in a public school. It's that simple. Regardless of someones motives to out the teacher. The teacher was wrong. End of story.

[Guest Guest]

If I had done what he did, not at all! But he was the one who did it, so I guess he is the one who needs to deal with it. Trust me, I feel bad for your son because it looks like he wants attention and he wants to make his daddy happy. By the way, Paul, did you give your son a hug today?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't be a jackass. I would have thought by now that everyone would have fallen into a level of comfort with the fact that Matthew is a young, politically active individual - who also happens to be a bit of a nudge. But whether or not you agree with him - you must acknowledge that he is both passionate and persistent in respect of his cause.

I don't agree with everything that he's done or even how he went about it. I don't agree with alot of Matthew's beliefs - or Paul's beliefs - or Strife - or Calybos or others for that matter. However, I do believe that the men who actually stared down musket barrels for the sake of this country, and who by their own bloodshed proved their worth for the freedoms we enjoy without cost, would have encouraged Matthew to state his case and fight for his beliefs.

Our founding principles include the encouragement of open debate and the tolerance of antithetical opinions. Instead of immediately getting on Matthew's back, we should sit back, listen to what he has to say, digest it, and determine whether the conduct of which he is complaining is legal, moral and/or ethical. They're different opinions and - like I said - I don't agree with them all. However, I am all the better for having heard and considered them - even if it only fortifies my own beliefs.

And as to your last barb at Paul - I don't believe for a minute that anyone would WANT his or her son to have to endure the type of abuse that he is taking on a regular basis. I would lay odds that Paul's heart both swells with pride and breaks with pain witnessing the abuse his son is absorbing on a daily basis. So save your snippy little comments until you've walked a mile in Paul's or Matthew's moccasins.

[Strife767]

So I guess you were there?

The recordings put everyone's ears there. For all intents and purposes, yes, I was there, because I heard exactly what was said.

Its not preaching its teaching.

So what part of the history curriculum involves telling the students who does and doesn't belong in hell? You are delusional.

So now he is a wackjob?

Yes! He's broadcast his incompetence as a history teacher by pawning off BASIC errors about the foundation of this country and the Constitution that are common mostly to dishonest theists who aim to rewrite US history in an attempt to convince everyone that the USA is a "Christian nation" that should be run according to the Bible.

So if every word you said was put under a microscope like this teacher is having done, you would be not last. Ohh wait, working for the town you don't have to worry about mistakes, do you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Write the above in coherent English, and then I'll answer it.

[Strife767]

(didn't feel like splitting the post up (come on guys, there must be some way to really fix this 10-quote-tag limit), so used code tags instead)

I guess you are the only one here that really knows what you are talking about.   You can’t take other peoples opinions because they are not yours.  Can you hear yourself talking?

First the "you're in the minority so you're wrong" fallacy...

And by the way I do know what I am talking about since I have someone in the same school as your son.

...then the "I'm in the majority so I'm right" fallacy.

So factually, since you are not in the class you do not get firsthand what goes on in there as well.  So get off your cloud.

Oh, okay, so you know better what you're talking about than Paul because while Paul only has a son who is directly involved with the issue, you have a kid who happens to go to the same school (I'm sure you would have mentioned he/she was in the same class if he/she was). Oh yes, we should all just ignore Paul and listen to you! (D**bA**)

Wow two awards. At what cost. And you said you weren't after the money. Just who do you think you are kidding?

If someone walks up to you and hands you a $10 bill, does that make you a beggar? That's exactly the ridiculous logic you are using above.

Who do you think is paying for this entire in-service teacher training?  Who is going to pay for the seminars also?

Exactly how much money is Matthew or Paul receiving as a result of the training/seminars? What in the world does this have to do with your accusation that Paul is "after the money?"

So who else besides your son is causing such harm to school system?

What a dishonest loaded question. Matthew's exposition of the unethical, irreponsible, and unconstitutional 'teaching' methods Mr. Paszkiewicz has been using does nothing but HELP the school system by alerting them to a 'weak link.' If anyone is harming the school system, it is the teacher that's been using his desk as a pulpit to preach his religion and his anti-science politics and impose them on a captive audience. And yet, the person you get mad at is not Paskiewicz, but Paul? How stupid can you be?

Not one of the other students seem to have issues?  A whistle-blower or a trouble maker; we both have different views on this and so does most people.

Just a rewording of "we're the majority and you're the minority so we're right and you're wrong" nonsense.

Do you realize that Valentines’ Day was originally a religious holiday?

Um, no, it wasn't. It's just another instance of the Christian "let's make a holiday on the same day as a pagan one to make it easier to convert the heathens" move. It used to be (yet another, lol) fertility festival:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentine'...ility_festivals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupercalia

It's amazing just how often Christians try to say that their holidays all came first, when virtually every single one of them existed for centuries before they 'hijacked' them and applied their own themes. As an example, Valentine's Day itself was only first referenced as a day specifically related to romantic love in 1382 by Chaucer.

Are you going to take that away from the school system too?

Personally, I am in favor of major religious holidays no longer being government holidays. That is a problem that few are willing to address, because they like the day off.

Please do tell me what I posted about you that is not true?

Right in the post I'm replying to, you accused Paul of being motivated solely/primarily not by the issue, but by money. That's obviously a completely baseless allegation, and a shameless attempt to smear his reputation. Have you no shame?

I am sure you can sleep just fine.  Being without a conscience I am sure you can sleep just fine. [snip]

More ad hominem. Is that what Jesus would say?

[Guest Paul]

     

I guess you are the only one here that really knows what you are talking about.  You can’t take other peoples opinions because they are not yours.  Can you hear yourself talking?  And by the way I do know what I am talking about since I have someone in the same school as your son.  So factually, since you are not in the class you do not get firsthand what goes on in there as well.  So get off your cloud. 

Wow two awards. At what cost. And you said you weren't after the money. Just who do you think you are kidding?  Who do you think is paying for this entire in-service teacher training?  Who is going to pay for the seminars also? 

So who else besides your son is causing such harm to school system?  Not one of the other students seem to have issues?  A whistle-blower or a trouble maker; we both have different views on this and so does most people. 

Do you realize that Valentines’ Day was originally a religious holiday? Are you going to take that away from the school system too?  Please do tell me what I posted about you that is not true?  I am sure you can sleep just fine.  Being without a conscience I am sure you can sleep just fine.  You seem to believe that your righteous stand and that you are judge and jury with your accusations.  Getting a few rabble rousers here to back you while the rest of the masses suffer does not bother you one bit.  But I am sure you can sleep just fine.  So every week you ask him if he would like to be removed from class?  And you say this doesn't bother you? 

     

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I couldn't take other people's opinions, I wouldn't be posting here. I do get frustrated when people like yourself make remarks without any basis in fact, but I'm not the one lining my posts with Ninjas.

Matthew is not harming the school system. He's calling on its administrators to do their jobs. The school system has a teacher who thinks it's OK to proselytize his students, and tell them they belong in hell if they don't agree with him; apparently you have no problem with that, considering your remarks about the origins of Valentine's Day. Has it not occurred to you that we would have protested that by now if we thought it was an issue. You wouldn't put up with "you belong in hell" for one instant if it was coming from a Muslim, or any other religion, and being directed to your kid. But you think I should put up with it when it's directed toward mine. The words for that are hypocrisy and bigotry.

We have a teacher in the system who was far out of line. The world sees it. It's why the story has been all over the news. The problem is real, and Matthew didn't cause it. He merely exposed it, and you don't like it, because you have no problem with my kid being told he belongs in hell. Let it be said to your precious, and we'll see how sanguine you are about it.

Too many people in town don't take the Constitution seriously. They think it can be violated at will and we can still preserve our system of laws. Legal systems don't work that way.

[Guest K]

"Why didn't he choose a more apt example, like WMDs in Iraq? That is a much closer example, where a political figure and national leader cooked information and spun it to the public for his own purposes."

Wait, wait, wait…I have an even better, and closer, example, and one that the students have been a part of and therefore, might better see the comparison: the LaClairs vs. the “Preacher-Teacher”…talk about spin and using it for your own purposes!!! Hmmm…what do you think

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

(didn't feel like splitting the post up (come on guys, there must be some way to really fix this 10-quote-tag limit), so used code tags instead)

I guess you are the only one here that really knows what you are talking about.   You can’t take other peoples opinions because they are not yours.  Can you hear yourself talking?

First the "you're in the minority so you're wrong" fallacy...

And by the way I do know what I am talking about since I have someone in the same school as your son.

...then the "I'm in the majority so I'm right" fallacy.

So factually, since you are not in the class you do not get firsthand what goes on in there as well.  So get off your cloud.

Oh, okay, so you know better what you're talking about than Paul because while Paul only has a son who is directly involved with the issue, you have a kid who happens to go to the same school (I'm sure you would have mentioned he/she was in the same class if he/she was). Oh yes, we should all just ignore Paul and listen to you! (D**bA**)

Wow two awards. At what cost. And you said you weren't after the money. Just who do you think you are kidding?

If someone walks up to you and hands you a $10 bill, does that make you a beggar? That's exactly the ridiculous logic you are using above.

Who do you think is paying for this entire in-service teacher training?  Who is going to pay for the seminars also?

Exactly how much money is Matthew or Paul receiving as a result of the training/seminars? What in the world does this have to do with your accusation that Paul is "after the money?"

So who else besides your son is causing such harm to school system?

What a dishonest loaded question. Matthew's exposition of the unethical, irreponsible, and unconstitutional 'teaching' methods Mr. Paszkiewicz has been using does nothing but HELP the school system by alerting them to a 'weak link.' If anyone is harming the school system, it is the teacher that's been using his desk as a pulpit to preach his religion and his anti-science politics and impose them on a captive audience. And yet, the person you get mad at is not Paskiewicz, but Paul? How stupid can you be?

Not one of the other students seem to have issues?  A whistle-blower or a trouble maker; we both have different views on this and so does most people.

Just a rewording of "we're the majority and you're the minority so we're right and you're wrong" nonsense.

Do you realize that Valentines’ Day was originally a religious holiday?

Um, no, it wasn't. It's just another instance of the Christian "let's make a holiday on the same day as a pagan one to make it easier to convert the heathens" move. It used to be (yet another, lol) fertility festival:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentine'...ility_festivals

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupercalia

It's amazing just how often Christians try to say that their holidays all came first, when virtually every single one of them existed for centuries before they 'hijacked' them and applied their own themes. As an example, Valentine's Day itself was only first referenced as a day specifically related to romantic love in 1382 by Chaucer.

Are you going to take that away from the school system too?

Personally, I am in favor of major religious holidays no longer being government holidays. That is a problem that few are willing to address, because they like the day off.

Please do tell me what I posted about you that is not true?

Right in the post I'm replying to, you accused Paul of being motivated solely/primarily not by the issue, but by money. That's obviously a completely baseless allegation, and a shameless attempt to smear his reputation. Have you no shame?

I am sure you can sleep just fine.  Being without a conscience I am sure you can sleep just fine. [snip]

More ad hominem. Is that what Jesus would say?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can almost hear Paul talking through your words. Sure you are not related or sleep together or something? Just asking. A lot of that going on these days. Nice to know you might be one and the same.

Yes I have a direct interest in this and when Paul doesn't feel like using his name along comes "Strife767" to bail him out. I'm surprised he isn't using Lonelygirl16 too. But that one is taken. Didn't know Paul needed an interpreter. And I never said anything about Jesus did I, Stiff. Name misspelled on purpose since you cannot seem to get mine correct.

Look in up in Wikipedia: Heres a link for the absent minded who can't find it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentine's_Day

or are encylopedia's too advanced for you?

"Saint Valentine's Day or Valentine's Day is on February 14. It is the traditional day on which lovers express their love for each other; sending Valentine's cards or candy. It is very common to present flowers on Valentine's Day. The holiday is named after two men, both Christian martyrs named Valentine. The day became associated with romantic love in the High Middle Ages, when the tradition of courtly love flourished."

Sleep good.

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

If I couldn't take other people's opinions, I wouldn't be posting here. I do get frustrated when people like yourself make remarks without any basis in fact, but I'm not the one lining my posts with Ninjas.

Matthew is not harming the school system. He's calling on its administrators to do their jobs. The school system has a teacher who thinks it's OK to proselytize his students, and tell them they belong in hell if they don't agree with him; apparently you have no problem with that, considering your remarks about the origins of Valentine's Day. Has it not occurred to you that we would have protested that by now if we thought it was an issue. You wouldn't put up with "you belong in hell" for one instant if it was coming from a Muslim, or any other religion, and being directed to your kid. But you think I should put up with it when it's directed toward mine. The words for that are hypocrisy and bigotry.

We have a teacher in the system who was far out of line. The world sees it. It's why the story has been all over the news. The problem is real, and Matthew didn't cause it. He merely exposed it, and you don't like it, because you have no problem with my kid being told he belongs in hell. Let it be said to your precious, and we'll see how sanguine you are about it.

Too many people in town don't take the Constitution seriously. They think it can be violated at will and we can still preserve our system of laws. Legal systems don't work that way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So this is your problem? Too many people do not take the Constitution seriously? And the way to get them to take notice is to attack a teacher for his methodology of teaching? Since you cannot take on the United States government on religion, take on one teacher. He doesn't have a lawyer. Just someone who's methodology of teaching appear to sometime use comparisons that his students may never have heard thought about comparing (i.e. Hitler, Bible, evolution). Using these he is getting the class to think, not necessarily think that it’s the only correlation. And from what I have heard the students are very eager to participate in that class. And there no one has been induced into joining his religion or any other one as far as I can tell. If they have could you please tell me who? But it was a way to make a name for yourself and your son.

Tipping my hat, congratulations. Going after the little prey. Feeding on the bottom. Good attorney and future attorney.

You got your name and your son's in the limelight.

Was taught if you don't have anything good to say about someone, then don't say anything at all. So I will leave you with this. ......................................

[Strife767]

So this is your problem?  Too many people  do not take the Constitution seriously?

Do you not consider that a problem?

And the way to get them to take notice is to attack a teacher for his methodology of teaching?

If it's unconstitutional, it should be exposed and removed.

Since you cannot take  on the United States government on religion, take on one teacher. He doesn't have a lawyer.

He should have thought about that before trampling on children's civil rights.

Just someone who's methodology of teaching appear to sometime use comparisons that his students may never have heard thought about comparing (i.e. Hitler, Bible, evolution).

lol, some of the most shameless sugarcoating I've seen of Paszkiewicz's actions yet.

Using these he is getting the class to think, not necessarily think that it’s the only correlation.

Suuure...

And from what I have heard the students are very eager to participate in that class.

Students do not have the authority to give their teacher the right to violate the Constitution. Any number of students' consent is wholly irrelevant.

And there no one has been induced into joining his religion or any other one as far as I can tell.

(kinda hard when most of the class is already the same religion as the teacher, duh)

Only a complete fool would seriously argue against the unconstitutionality of Paszkiewicz's actions. It's legal suicide.

If they have could you please tell me who?

If you think it doesn't count as preaching unless there is successful conversion, you have got a lot to learn, buddy. Crack open a law book before you make more of a fool of yourself on this matter, seriously.

But it was a way to make a name for yourself and your son.

Fact: Matthew spoke to Paszkiewicz about his actions before he ever contacted the media.

Fact: Paszkiewicz's stubbornness on the matter gave Matthew no other way to expose his wrongdoing other than catching him in the act (and on tape)

Fact: The media did not learn of the scandal until months after it had occurred.

Fact: There is zero evidence supporting the 'publicity stunt' allegation.

Deal with it.

Tipping my hat, congratulations.  Going after the little prey. Feeding on the bottom.  Good attorney and future attorney.

You got your name and your son's in the limelight.

     

Was taught if you don't have anything good to say about someone, then don't say anything at all.

Apparently you're not a good learner, then. Twenty seconds of searching found this:

"You are such an egotistical bigot...You just disgust me." --http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php?showtopic=3891&st=120&p=45332entry45332

Hypocrite.

[Guest Paul]

     

So this is your problem?  Too many people  do not take the Constitution seriously?  And the way to get them to take notice is to attack a teacher for his methodology of teaching?  Since you cannot take  on the United States government on religion, take on one teacher. He doesn't have a lawyer.  Just someone who's methodology of teaching appear to sometime use comparisons that his students may never have heard thought about comparing (i.e. Hitler, Bible, evolution). Using these he is getting the class to think, not necessarily think that it’s the only correlation. And from what I have heard the students are very eager to participate in that class.  And there no one has been induced into joining his religion or any other one as far as I can tell.  If they have could you please tell me who?  But it was a way to make a name for yourself and your son.

Tipping my hat, congratulations.  Going after the little prey. Feeding on the bottom.  Good attorney and future attorney.

You got your name and your son's in the limelight.

     

Was taught if you don't have anything good to say about someone, then don't say anything at all. So I will leave you with this. ......................................

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Donna, you don't really think you're fooling anyone, do you?

I hate to be dismissive of anyone, but your posts are ridiculous. Telling someone else's kids, uninvited, that they belong in hell is not a teaching method. It is a violation of the Constitution, a violation of the civil rights of student and parents, and mighty rude. Unless you can tell us what "teaching method" dinosaurs on Noah's ark fits into, I suggest that you rethink your views. However, I have the sense that is not your way.

Obviously no amount of reason and no number of facts will induce you to open, much less change your mind. Please forgive me, then, if I don't respond further.

[Strife767]

     

Okay, I can't help the curiosity anymore. What is the significance of these smilies? o.O

I can almost hear Paul talking through your words.

All of the rational people around the world who have reacted to this situation sound similarly. If you think this is an insult, think again. It's an honor to compare me to someone as successful as Paul.

Sure you are not related or sleep together or something?  Just asking.  A lot of that going on these days.   Nice to know you might be one and the same.

"Is your mother a whore? What? I'm not saying she's a whore. I'm just wondering out loud if she is a whore. All I'm saying is reasonable people who have banged your mother for money can disagree!" --Jon Stewart, http://thatvideosite.com/video/3281

I'm sure. We're not, we don't, and I'm sure you know it. Stop acting like and/or being an idiot.

Yes I have a direct interest in this and when Paul doesn't feel like using his name along comes "Strife767" to bail him out.

Yeah, yeah, blah blah, heard it a million times. I'm not Paul.

I'm surprised he isn't using Lonelygirl16 too.

The KOTW admin(s) could back us both up and show that, besides the few times Paul posted as a guest or that time or two he posted while Matthew was logged in (and each time he pointed the mistake out himself), looking at the IP addresses behind the posts, that not only do they not match between he and I, but that they also don't match between him and any other alias used on this forum.

But that one is taken. Didn't know Paul needed an interpreter. And I never said anything about Jesus did I, Stiff.  Name misspelled on purpose since you cannot seem to get mine correct. 

Look in up in Wikipedia:  Heres a link for the absent minded who  can't find it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentine's_Day

or are encylopedia's too advanced for you?

Yeah, ask if encyclopedias are too advanced for me while you display the inability to use apostrophes correctly. LOL! Love seeing the elementary grammar mistakes within the insults to intelligence. Beautiful irony. Here's a tip--plural nouns don't use apostrophes. I learned that in second or third grade and I never forgot it. What's your excuse?

"Saint Valentine's Day or Valentine's Day is on February 14. It is the traditional day on which lovers express their love for each other; sending Valentine's cards or candy. It is very common to present flowers on Valentine's Day. The holiday is named after two men, both Christian martyrs named Valentine. The day became associated with romantic love in the High Middle Ages, when the tradition of courtly love flourished."

What about the holidays that were celebrated the same time of year, except centuries upon centuries earlier? I pointed out that mid-February was celebrated as a holiday far, FAR before Christians started celebrating it. Example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lupercalia#Origins

In fact, from what I've just read, sounds like the evidence for the mere existence of this "Saint Valentine" fellow is as shaky as that of Jesus:

"Saint Valentine refers to one or more martyred saints of ancient Rome. The feast of Saint Valentine was formerly celebrated on February 14 by the Roman Catholic Church until the revised calendar 1969.

His birth date and birthplace are unknown. Valentine's name does not occur in the earliest list of Roman martyrs, that was compiled by the Chronographer of 354.

The feast of St. Valentine was first decreed in 496 by Pope Gelasius I, who included Valentine among those "... whose names are justly reverenced among men, but whose acts are known only to God." As Gelasius implied, nothing is known about the lives of any of these martyrs." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Valentine

No birth day, no birthplace, nothing known about the life, you guys don't even know how MANY of them there were! It's amazing what some people will stomach.

[Calybos]

All politics is local. Not every case can be argued in front of the Supreme Court.

It takes local activists to preserve the Constitution on a local level. If that bothers you, by all means get off your ass and get involved yourself.

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

Donna, you don't really think you're fooling anyone, do you?

I hate to be dismissive of anyone, but your posts are ridiculous. Telling someone else's kids, uninvited, that they belong in hell is not a teaching method. It is a violation of the Constitution, a violation of the civil rights of student and parents, and mighty rude. Unless you can tell us what "teaching method" dinosaurs on Noah's ark fits into, I suggest that you rethink your views. However, I have the sense that is not your way.

Obviously no amount of reason and no number of facts will induce you to open, much less change your mind. Please forgive me, then, if I don't respond further.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have faith that you will not respond further. Lets see how far that gets me. Please pull up the quote where your child is in hell? You keep threatening but never produce it. It is never directed toward your child.

It could be worse, he could be stuck in this blog.

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

Okay, I can't help the curiosity anymore. What is the significance of these smilies? o.O

All of the rational people around the world who have reacted to this situation sound similarly. If you think this is an insult, think again. It's an honor to compare me to someone as successful as Paul.

"Is your mother a whore? What? I'm not saying she's a whore. I'm just wondering out loud if she is a whore. All I'm saying is reasonable people who have banged your mother for money can disagree!" --Jon Stewart, http://thatvideosite.com/video/3281

     

My mother is dead thank you. So you have stooped to this level. You are classless.

Yeah, yeah, blah blah, heard it a million times. I'm not Paul.

The KOTW admin(s) could back us both up and show that, besides the few times Paul posted as a guest or that time or two he posted while Matthew was logged in (and each time he pointed the mistake out himself), looking at the IP addresses behind the posts, that not only do they not match between he and I, but that they also don't match between him and any other alias used on this forum.

Yeah, ask if encyclopedias are too advanced for me while you display the inability to use apostrophes correctly. LOL! Love seeing the elementary grammar mistakes within the insults to intelligence. Beautiful irony. Here's a tip--plural nouns don't use apostrophes. I learned that in second or third grade and I never forgot it. What's your excuse?

At least I graduated third grade. What's your excuse.

Different computers have different IP addresses. So two people in the same house can have different IP's. I can't believe someone so self-pronounced expert on everything didn't know that.

[Guest Guest]

Fact: Matthew spoke to Paszkiewicz about his actions before he ever contacted the media.

Fact: Paszkiewicz's stubbornness on the matter gave Matthew no other way to expose his wrongdoing other than catching him in the act (and on tape)

Fact: The media did not learn of the scandal until months after it had occurred.

Fact: There is zero evidence supporting the 'publicity stunt' allegation.

"

Strife, do you see what happens when you jump on the "band wagon" in the middle of the "parade"? Get your facts straight!

Fact: Matthew never confronted Paszkiewicz until after he taped him (which he started taping the first week of school) and continued to tape him for a while.

Fact: Never once did he confront him until the meeting with the principal and his tapes. Never once did he say to Paskiewicz " Hey, stop talking about religion"

Fact: Paul sent Matt into that meeting alone, Paul did not attend.

Fact: Paul did not attend a BOE meeting to complain until after he contacted the media.

Fact: The media was contacted by the LeClairs.

Fact: The NY Times reported it months later after the LeClairs hounded them to report it.

Publicity stunt with zero evidence? yea, but, sooooo obvious!

[Guest bewildered]

He doesn't have a lawyer.

If he doesn't have a lawyer, either he's a fool or he can't get anyone to take his case seriously.

Or maybe it's a little of both.

[Guest Guest]

Donna, you don't really think you're fooling anyone, do you?

I hate to be dismissive of anyone, but your posts are ridiculous. Telling someone else's kids, uninvited, that they belong in hell is not a teaching method. It is a violation of the Constitution, a violation of the civil rights of student and parents, and mighty rude. Unless you can tell us what "teaching method" dinosaurs on Noah's ark fits into, I suggest that you rethink your views. However, I have the sense that is not your way.

Obviously no amount of reason and no number of facts will induce you to open, much less change your mind. Please forgive me, then, if I don't respond further.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul, I believe that you do not train Matthew very well. You are either not sure about what you believe and can't explain it to Matthew or he has problems learning what you are teaching him. Seriously, if your son is so sure of what he believes, he would be laughing at the teacher instead of making a big deal out of it. If I had a teacher telling me that the moon is a god, I would just ignore it because I know it is not true and I know what I believe in. I am sure that nothing, absolutely nothing can shake my faith. It took me years to get to this point. Apparently, your son is not so sure in what he believes, because if he was, the teacher would not have offended him. I am sure that Matthew is not the only "atheist"(or whatver he is), in that classroom. The only difference is that he is so confused that he can't just laugh at the teacher and let go. He had to go farther to really really really prove that Mr.P is wrong. It is exactly what you are doing. I don't have to go around telling people and trying to prove that the moon is not a god because that's pathetic and people know it is not true. So, why wasting so much of your time trying to prove that God doesn't exist? If he doesn't exist, then there is no point of trying to prove that...Do you believe that the sun is a dragon? I am sure you don't. Do you spend time trying to prove that? probably not, why not? Because it is not true....get it?

[Guest Guest]

Paul, I believe that you do not train Matthew very well. You are either not sure about what you believe and can't explain it to Matthew or he has problems learning what you are teaching him. Seriously, if your son is so sure of what he believes, he would be laughing at the teacher instead of making a big deal out of it. If I had a teacher telling me that the moon is a god, I would just ignore it because I know it is not true and I know what I believe in. I am sure that nothing, absolutely nothing can shake my faith. It took me years to get to this point. Apparently, your son is not so sure in what he believes, because if he was, the teacher would not have offended him. I am sure that Matthew is not the only "atheist"(or whatver he is), in that classroom. The only difference is that he is so confused that he can't just laugh at the teacher and let go. He had to go farther to really really really prove that Mr.P is wrong. It is exactly what you are doing. I don't have to go around telling people and trying to prove that the moon is not a god because that's pathetic and people know it is not true. So, why wasting so much of your time trying to prove that God doesn't exist? If he doesn't exist, then there is no point of trying to prove that...Do you believe that the sun is a dragon? I am sure you don't. Do you spend time trying to prove that? probably not, why not? Because it is not true....get it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As an intelligent person Paul should know better. But for a guy like him the chance to test The Constitution is a dream come true. His daughter couldn't or wouldn't find a cause for him when she was in KHS. Now Matthew has come through. He's tried it all; wearing a dress to protest the dress code, putting up pictures on his locker to protest President Bush, refusing to stand and say the pledge, etc. It's one thing after another. That's what most of the people posting here don't know about.

So Matthew outed a teacher that was spewing his opinion, in this case on religion and science, in his classroom. Big deal. The reality is, this happens all of the time at all levels of education and througout all of our lives. Matthew is going to have to learn to deal with it without turning into a lawsuit. Unless of course that was Paul and Matthew's original intention.

What does Paul have to say about the college professor that was comparing the people working in the WTC on 9/11 to Hitler's propaganda team? Probably nothing. That professor was exercising his right to free speech, right Paul? It doesn't matter whether what the professor said was true or not. It doesn't matter who he hurt or offended. He didn't offend Paul or Matthew so it's OK.

This whole situation is silly. Paul wants us to believe how brave Matthew is and what great courage he showed. Well if he's brave enough to record a teacher and confront him with it in front of the administartion then why should we believe he was intimidated by the teacher in the classroom. Why didn't Matthew say that he was uncomfortable with what the teacher was discussing? Why didn't he get up and leave the classroom and report it to the administration? Why did he continue the discussion? If this was such a hot issue then why didn't Paul immediately meet with the Principal the day it started? I guess that wouldn't have been as interesting. Paul and Matthew wouldn't have gotten their chance to defend our Constitutional Rights.

The real problem here is the administration's and BOE's inability to deal with the situation in a reasonable and logical manner. But I'm sure Paul knew this would be the case from the start. Most BOEs are pretty predictable. Now we have idiots like Strife and Calybos pretending to be historians and Constitutional Scholars backing Paul up, and claiming to know the minds and intentions of the framers of The Constitution. They want the teacher fired. That's their idea of justice. Of course in their lives they could never live up to the standards they want to hold this teacher up to. It really is pretty funny.

The teacher was wrong in what he was doing. The administration should have had a meeting with the parent, student, and teacher present, and the teacher should have been told the discussion of religion and science, outside the scope of the curriculum was unacceptable. This is common sense. Something the law used to be based on.

[Guest Paul]

Fact: Matthew never confronted Paszkiewicz until after he taped him  (which he started taping the first week of school) and continued to tape him for a while.

Fact: Never once did he confront him until the meeting with the principal and his tapes. Never once did he say to Paskiewicz " Hey, stop talking about religion"

Fact: Paul sent Matt into that meeting alone, Paul did not attend.

Fact: Paul did not attend a BOE meeting to complain until after he contacted the media.

Fact: The media was contacted by the LeClairs.

Fact: The NY Times reported it months later after the LeClairs hounded them to report it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Facts: Although I sent a press release to media, The New York Times contacted me independently in late November, having apparently passed by the press release. I got a call from Tina Kelley on my cell phone one day while I was meeting with a doctor in preparation for a case. The New York Times reported the story approximately three weeks after Ms. Kelley called me, and approximately five weeks after our press release. Do you really think we have the power to "hound" The New York Times into printing a story? If you do, you know absolutely nothing about how that newspaper operates. We know no one there until now, and even now they run this story when they want to, now when we would like. What is the basis for saying we "hounded" them, or that any such behavior would have gotten the story in the paper? You're just stringing together words that don't mean anything. This appears to be a pattern common within the radical religious right, so I'm not surprised to see it coming from Mr. Paszkiewicz's apologists; that doesn't make it right.

Fact: Matthew began recording the third day of class, after the extreme nature of the proselytizing was obvious.

Fact: Matthew had no obligation to speak to Mr. Paszkiewicz first, any more than a citizen has an obligation to speak to a perpetrator first instead of contacting the police.

Analysis: You may object to the comparison on the grounds that Mr. Paszkiewicz's behavior is not criminal, and to that extent you would be correct. However, the counterbalance is that there is a power disparity between the teacher and the student, and when a teacher's behavior is egregious and apparently part of a long-standing pattern, the student has every right to take it over the teacher's head first.

Invitation: Mr. Paszkiewicz's apologists keep making this point, but never address what they believe is wrong with the course Matthew took. What is wrong with the course of action he took? Isn't the real beef here that you don't like this teacher being outed for engaging in improper conduct for a very long time? How convenient your solution would have been for him. "Hey, warn me instead of turning me in so I can avoid getting caught and keep doing the same thing in all the other classes." I don't think so. By his own words, this teacher was on a mission to preach religion to his students. Matthew took the most appropriate course of action to stop him. What is wrong with the course of action he took?

Fact: I wrote four letters to the administration and the Board before contacting the media, practically begging them to resolve this with us. We were ignored, and then the Board's attorney told me I wasn't entitled to know how they were going to address it. So we contacted the media. What is wrong with that?

Fact: The principal told Matthew that we, his parents, would not be allowed to attend the meeting.

In any case, from our perspective, and regarding all your other points, so what? Matthew made a judgment about the most appropriate course of action, and it did not involve speaking with Mr. Paszkiewicz first. As he and I have explained repeatedly, it was and is obvious (from Mr. Paszkiewicz's behavior then, from his failure to respond to a personal e-mail from me and from his stubborn letters to the Kearny Observer within the past month) that he sees nothing wrong with his behavior, which obviously would have persisted had Matthew not taken it over his head --- and may yet if he thinks he can get away with it. Clearly, he thinks he was within his rights. I understand his attorney said as much at the January Board meeting. He wants to, thinks he can, and thinks it's part of his mission to spread what he calls the Gospel; what makes you think he won't?

Fact: You're making these comments behind a shield of anonymity. You just don't like the fact that this teacher's proselytizing was exposed. Of course, you can deny that, but to have any credibility at all, you'll have to identify yourself.

[Guest Paul]

He doesn't have a lawyer.

If he doesn't have a lawyer, either he's a fool or he can't get anyone to take his case seriously.

Or maybe it's a little of both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

All parties have lawyers. I suggest you watch the news early this coming week.

[Guest Paul]

Paul, I believe that you do not train Matthew very well. You are either not sure about what you believe and can't explain it to Matthew or he has problems learning what you are teaching him. Seriously, if your son is so sure of what he believes, he would be laughing at the teacher instead of making a big deal out of it. If I had a teacher telling me that the moon is a god, I would just ignore it because I know it is not true and I know what I believe in. I am sure that nothing, absolutely nothing can shake my faith. It took me years to get to this point. Apparently, your son is not so sure in what he believes, because if he was, the teacher would not have offended him. I am sure that Matthew is not the only "atheist"(or whatver he is), in that classroom. The only difference is that he is so confused that he can't just laugh at the teacher and let go. He had to go farther to really really really prove that Mr.P is wrong. It is exactly what you are doing. I don't have to go around telling people and trying to prove that the moon is not a god because that's pathetic and people know it is not true. So, why wasting so much of your time trying to prove that God doesn't exist? If he doesn't exist, then there is no point of trying to prove that...Do you believe that the sun is a dragon? I am sure you don't. Do you spend time trying to prove that? probably not, why not? Because it is not true....get it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You completely miss the point. Mr. Paszkiewicz's proselytizing did not shake Matthew's religious beliefs one bit. The reason Matthew did what he did was to defend several important principles:

1. Separation of church and state, per the First Amendment to the US Constitution. (They put it first for very good reasons.)

2. The integrity of science education, to defend it against nonsensical attacks by a "scientifically illiterate" teacher.

3. The rule of law itself.

4. The integrity of a public education, in which students are taught objective truths, instead of the subjective ramblings of an ideologue.

These are all lessons we taught him at home, and I am proud to say that he appears to have learned them very well. The two organizations who have already given him awards get it. You are the one who does not understand what we taught him.

There are other reasons why he did what he did, but those make the point. Matthew did not do this for himself. He did it to uphold important principles that bind our country together and give the educational system its validity. That is why he has already been given two awards from organizations that care about these principles; why roughly a dozen attorneys from private law firms and from two nationally-based public advocacy groups are donating their time to work on this case; and why the story has been all over the news. None of that would happen if this was just about a hypersensitive high school student who had his beliefs challenged or his feelings hurt. You've completely missed the point.

By the way, both he and I have had many a laugh at this teacher. I wouldn't have imagined that someone in his position would say things that are so --- I hate to use the word --- stupid. That's not the point either. The point is that we can't expect the educational system to work or the Constitution to be preserved if public school teachers can just babble about whatever they like. They have a public responsibility. Telling high school students that dinosaurs were on Noah's ark doesn't threaten Matthew's beliefs; it's just ignorant and outrageous. That's why it keeps being mentioned in the news. Get it?

[Guest Paul]

Paul, I believe that you do not train Matthew very well. You are either not sure about what you believe and can't explain it to Matthew or he has problems learning what you are teaching him. Seriously, if your son is so sure of what he believes, he would be laughing at the teacher instead of making a big deal out of it. If I had a teacher telling me that the moon is a god, I would just ignore it because I know it is not true and I know what I believe in. I am sure that nothing, absolutely nothing can shake my faith. It took me years to get to this point. Apparently, your son is not so sure in what he believes, because if he was, the teacher would not have offended him. I am sure that Matthew is not the only "atheist"(or whatver he is), in that classroom. The only difference is that he is so confused that he can't just laugh at the teacher and let go. He had to go farther to really really really prove that Mr.P is wrong. It is exactly what you are doing. I don't have to go around telling people and trying to prove that the moon is not a god because that's pathetic and people know it is not true. So, why wasting so much of your time trying to prove that God doesn't exist? If he doesn't exist, then there is no point of trying to prove that...Do you believe that the sun is a dragon? I am sure you don't. Do you spend time trying to prove that? probably not, why not? Because it is not true....get it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

By the way, why are y'all being so sensitive if this is just a sixteen-year-old kid with a thin skin?

[Strife767]

Please pull up the quote where your child is in hell? You keep threatening but never produce it.  It is never directed toward your child.

It was directed toward everyone who does not believe what he does. Don't be a fool.

[Strife767]

My mother is dead thank you. So you have stooped to this level. You are classless.

(Might want to learn how to work those quote tags before you put something you say in a quote of me next time)

No, stupid, you completely missed what I was saying. As I'm sure everyone else noticed, I quoted Stewart there to point out and make fun of your implication in the guise of a question. Not surprised it went right over your head, though.

At least I graduated third grade.

You could have fooled me, considering your elementary grammar mistakes.

What's your excuse.

Excuse for what? My spelling and grammar are pretty good, if you ask me.

Different computers have different IP addresses.

Not if they're on the same network and are sharing the same internet connection.

So two people in the same house can have different IP's.

1. It's very unlikely for two people in the same house to have/pay for two static IP addresses

2. One can easily still just look at the subnet to know that both IP addresses come from the same ISP, etc.

I can't believe someone so self-pronounced expert on everything didn't know that.

Are you honestly implying that Paul would pay two ISPs at once just so that he could mask his identity on a forum? You have no idea how ignorant you are, do you?

[Strife767]

Strife, do you see what happens when you jump on the "band wagon" in the middle of the "parade"? Get your facts straight!

This should be good, lol.

Fact: Matthew never confronted Paszkiewicz until after he taped him (which he started taping the first week of school) and continued to tape him for a while.

Hey, braniac...are you aware that "after he taped him" is still before the media was contacted? 'Cause I said he spoke to Paszkiewicz (in the meeting) long before the media was made aware, and that's true. Nice try, but it's not that easy to get away with twisting my words.

Fact: Never once did he confront him until the meeting with the principal and his tapes. Never once did he say to Paskiewicz " Hey, stop talking about religion"

It's pretty easy to refute statements I didn't make in the post you're replying to, huh? Pathetic.

Fact: Paul sent Matt into that meeting alone, Paul did not attend.

This is sematically incorrect. Paul did not send Matthew anywhere--Matthew, of his own will, decided to handle the situation himself, and imho he handled it quite well on his own.

Fact: Paul did not attend a BOE meeting to complain until after he contacted the media.

If that's true, it would be because he (and Matthew) expected the issue to be resolved once 'the tapes' came out. Instead, the administration didn't do squat about the situation at hand.

Fact: The media was contacted by the LeClairs.

What's your point? I would have too if nothing else was working, and the administration was taking no real action against Paszkiewicz.

Fact: The NY Times reported it months later after the LeClairs hounded them to report it.

Do you have any proof of this "hounding," or is it going to go on the pile of baseless allegations against Matthew/Paul we've got piling up here at KOTW?

Publicity stunt with zero evidence? yea

Thanks.