billydee4

I wonder what the conservatives will say when the Democrats are in charge and they are the ones who do the wiretapping?

Oh God! Two more rants from Bryan. This is my favorite quote: "I don't believe that LaClair has ever successfully pointed out a fallacy or an untruth on my part." meaning, even though I've been proven wrong a thousand times, I'm still right. I found this interesting article at crosswalk.com--I'm on their subscription list for some reason: Student Sues History Teacher Over Anti-Christian Comments The Christian Post reports that a lawsuit filed by a high school honors student and his parents against California history teacher James Corbett for anti-religion bias has ignited debate about the role of a teacher's convictions in the classroom. Chad Farnan, a sophomore, tape-recorded his Advanced Placement European history teacher's remarks, including: "When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth" and "Conservatives don't want women to avoid pregnancies -- that's interfering with God's work." Farnan said, "It just shocks me that someone would think that and say that. He's my teacher, and I've lost respect for him. I'm offended." The 16-year-old and his parents are suing Corbett for violating the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government from advancing religion or promoting hostility toward religion. "Corbett causes students who hold religious beliefs to feel like second-class citizens because of their protected religious expression, beliefs and conduct," stated an announcement by Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a Christian legal group representing Farnan. A christianist gets her feelings hurt and files a lawsuit. Now the Establishment Clause prohibits promoting hostility toward religion? What a crock! And remember, this is only the girl's side of the story.

Strife: They are all the same person. On his meds he sounds like Bryan--coherent but loony. 2dim and patrat are the ones that come out after the meds wear off.

They need to assign a team to look for the cave with the sign that says: OSAMA'S CLUBHOUSE--NO GURLZ ALOUD.

They are more likely deluded fundamentalist christians out of touch with reality. They represented 30.8% of the people identified as Democrats who voted in that primary, so you can't generalize anything about Kansas Democrats from this information. Nice try.

We have never declared war on Iraq. The people there and in the rest of the reason have plenty of reasons to hate us. Are you really stupid enough to think that the Middle East is getting its intelligence from American movies? They know about abuses before we do. The best way to avoid more American and Iraqi lives is to get the hell out of there.

1. Ann Coulter is an ass and a bigot. 2. We'll stay in Iraq until they are stabilized? When they can defend themselves against the Iranians? In what century will that be? Iran has a problem with our being in Iraq, not with Iraq itself. 3. We've already made Iraq a base for terrorism, which it wasn't before. Israel has been a target since 1948. 4. We've already pissed off many Muslims by invading one of their countries without provocation, so attacking another Muslim country is going to help how? Knocking Iran back to the stone age like we did in Iraq is not a way to win friends in the area. 5. We don't know if Iran has nuclear weapons yet or when they will have nuclear weapons. Israel has a stockpile. We have even more. God, are you stupid.

Sorry, Strife, but I have to call you on this. 2dumb has never had an answer, a counter-argument, or point. He only makes stupid comments when he either disagrees with or doesn't understand a post. I think he just doesnt understand much at all.

Sorry, Mr P, but history proves you wrong. First of all the island city of Tyre was the main city and the coastal settlements, the daughter-cities, were also part of the city. I can find no historical reference to Little Tyre and Big Tyre. Ez 26:5 says "It shall become, in the midst of the sea, a place for spreading nets." This is clearly a reference to the island. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to the city for thirteen years and never conquered it. Tyre would up paying tribute to Babylon. Even if they were part of the prophecy, four kingdoms do not make many nations. If Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed the coastal settlements, how then could Alexander come and raze it again a few hundred years later? The prophecy specifically says that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre. He didn't. It also says in verse 17-19 specifically say that the city will be covered with water. This clearly references an island. The coastal cities were never covered with water. Alexander razed the coastal settlements and made a causeway to the island, making Tyre a peninsula. It's still there today. I think my Brooklyn vs NYC analogy is valid. I listed several sites where you can find this information. You show nothing to back up your claims. The point I was trying to make is that, in addition to preaching fundamentalist christianity and teaching non-science as science, you were also very illogical in your discussions. I would not like to have anyone as confused as you teach my children or grandchildren.

But I'm sure he stuck his tongue out.

I just reread the transcripts I could find and, theology and preaching aside, Paszkiewicz, in some parts seems very confused. He often contradicts what had just said a few minutes before. Please indulge me. My comments are in blue. Student M1: What were the prophecies? Teacher: What were they? There were actually hundereds of 'em... Student M1: ...that came true... Teacher: New Testament, Old Testament? LaClaire: The ones that came true. Student M2: Go with easier. Teacher: I'll give you a major Old Testament prophecy, I'll give you two. One, the children of Israel themselves. Moses in Genesis talks about one day they're going to be in slavery for 400 years. Long before the event, but God would deliver them. And then in Exodus, they're in slavery, and He delivers 'em 430 years later. Things like that. [ So god was off by thirty years. What's 30 years if you are eternal? Could it be that Genesis was written after the exodus--if it actually happened?]You have many prophecies, like, um, I'll give you an interesting one, this is the Old Testament, this is in the book of Ezekiel. And Ezekiel gives us prophecies concerning the nations. He talks about the city of Tyre which would be off the coast of Lebanon in the ancient world. Tyre still exists in Lebanon today. This is the Mediterranean coast, where Israel would be here, Lebanon would be here, and he had the city of Tyre right here. Ezekiel rants in his prophecy against this king of Tyre and how evil he is and about how God is going to judge him. And in the ancient world, the people of this city was really impregnable, because what would happen was, there was a tiny island a quarter mile off the coast. Whenever they were going to be invaded, the people of the city would get on boats and go to what they called "Little Tyre", a walled rock [...?] out off the coast, and it had a water supply, and it had food stores and stuff, there. [so was the city of Tyre off the coast of Lebanon or on the coast?] Ezekiel said that they would come, that they would be conquered, that Tyre would be raized - that every stone would be overturned, and cast into the sea, and the men of the sea would be slaughtered, and it would be known as a place were fishermen mend their nets (??). You can look it up in the older Encyclopedia Brittanica, look up Tyre, and it will say that it's a place where fishermen mend their nets. Not the newest one, but the older one, the ones they had the old [???]. [Ezekiel specifically states that Nebuchadnezzar would do this. He never conquered Tyre. Also, the bible says nothing about Little Tyre and Big Tyre. What P is saying would be like someone saying "I am going to conquer New York City and then they take over Brooklyn and say they conquered New York City. This sounds like the Chewbacca defense. The newer Encyclopedia Brittanica editions may have dropped the part about the nets because the found out it wasn't true. Just a hunch on my part.]Alexander the Great comes down the scene of history. He's not a military guy, he's a soldier. [Huh? Soldiers don't count as "military guys"? ] He gets to Tyre, he wants to conquer the city, and he is so frustrated that the city has escaped. [He is trying to conquer a city that Nebuchadnezzar had already conquered and levelled? ] And he's [??] that, he has his men take every stone of the city and throw it into the sea to build a causeline [Not a real word] from the mainland to Little Tyre and slaughters the men of the city. [...??] [so Big Al takes all of the stones from a city that is no longer there and builds a "causeline"? Keep in mind that Ezekiel says that Nebuchadnezzar was going to destroy Tyre.] Student N1: Did Alexander the Great read the Bible? Teacher: No, this occured before his time. [P said earlier that Genesis was written in 1440 bce--a number he pulled out of somewhere dark and smelly--so Alexander very well could have read the Hebrew Scriptures.] It was predicted as a prophecy then - but it was that specific. Now the coastline of Lebanon looks like this. Because there's a causeway there. It's no longer an island. And you have Little Tyre out here and Tyre on the mainland, and that's how it was formed. And history records that Alexander the Great came and raized the city and threw it into the sea. [Again, Alexander is not mentioned in Ezekiel] Where were we goin, anyway? The transcripts quoted are from dranger.com. For more information, check out these websites: http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/.../2/992tyre.html davematson.edwardtbabinski.us/prophecy_tyre.html http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_tyre.html http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/th...16-20/16-06.htm Here is just a little more idiocy. Teacher: Nah, he just told Moses. You get it? LaClaire: And we know - wait, wait, and we know - Teacher: Yeah, for 6 days, there was only him and man. [Huh? Did man exist from Day 1? Why isn't this mentioned in Genesis?] Teacher: ...(w)here did Moses' conception of the universe come from? Cause it was unlike anything he'd been taught in school. And he had the order scientifically correct. You start with light, and then you go to - because you can't live without light generated from the sun. The energy that we get from the food that we eat, ultimately finds its way back to the source, the sun. Plants and photosynthesis, the beef that we enjoy eats the plants, and we get that energy from the beef. It transfers, and Moses had the order correct. [but Genesis says that light was created on the first day. Then god created plants on the third day. Plants need the sun for photosynthesis, but the sun wasn't created until the fourth day.] Paszkiewicz doesn't know history. He doesn't even know "biblical history." He just comes off as a pompous, ignorant raving radical fundamentalist. Now, people like Bryan will come back and try to tell us that this is all taken out of context. I think this is plenty of context for any rational person. I used to think that the biggest problem our society was that people are stupid. Now I think the problem is that some people want to be stupid. Why is this man still teaching?

Where can I find all of the tapes and/or the transcripts?

Says who?

No, we hate to read lies about American military successes. How many Iraqi battalions are ready to take over for us? 95? 30? 10? 2? How many times have we captured the Number Three man in Al Qaeda? Do we have a catch-and-release policy? A few years ago Condi Rice reported that we had captured x% of the leaders of Al Quaeda. She was asked what whole number that prepresented. She repeated x%. A percentage is a part of a whole. It is meaningless without knowing the whole number. And remember "Mission Accomplished"?

I don't like Ryan Davis' satires, but I thought Matthew handled himself well.

Ryan Davis is a satirist. This interview is satire. Sad to say, though, I have no problem believing that a radical fundie would say things like that. Here is Ryan's blog: www.huffingtonpost.com/ryan-j-davis/matthew-laclair-is-cool_b_69030.html. You can also check out his page on MySpace: profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=43838606

I've been following this issue from afar since the beginning. The people who think what Matthew did was wrong either recirculate arguments that have been proven wrong a thousand times, or they say something really, really stupid like "Kool-aid Alert" or they make fart remarks, or they call people names. I think that some of these discussions lead other people to think that Kearny is a backwards hick town full of radical right-wing fundies because most of the responses they see are written by people like patrat, 2dim, and brayn. Paul, Matt, and Strife sometimes seem like the only identifiable sane people in Kearny.

Finally something is happening that would make me actually to want to go to Kearny. What a coup! Congratulations to Matthew. And I hope Paszkiewicz's supporters show up to try to argue with any of the presenters. I hope they bring up Kirk Cameron's crocaduck!

I still believe that the total lack of support for Paszkiewicz by any of the extremist right wing media shows that his case was indefensible. If the extremist right is willing to support a girl who got approval for one valedictorian speech and then decided to proselytize instead, they would have jumped on Paszkiewicz's cause in a heartbeat if they thought it had any merit.

Focus on the (straight, two-parent with the father as master and the mother is subservient) Family has its headquarters in Colorado Springs. They treat it as if it were their own fiefdom. Check out Matt's post about the valectorian who is suing her school board. She presented one speech to her principal and then read a different one, urging everyone to "know Jesus". Her father works for Focus on the Family.

I love the way the extremist fundies twisted this one. Erica was dishonest when she presented her speech to the principal and then snuck a different one in, one that she knew beforehand would have not been approved. Thanking Jeebus or anyone else is okay but proselytizing is not. One wonders why it took them over a year to come up with the suit. Erica said she issued the apology because she was afraid that it would hurt her chances of getting into college. Doesn't it seem odd that a graduating senior does not know by graduation what schools have accepted her application? She was also dishonest, then, when she issued her apology. Instead of standing up for her principles she lied. What a testament to her faith. (I don't want to read people saying she was confused or frightened. Her own statements belie that.) Her parents said they sued because they wanted the school board to "adopt policies that protect student speech and elimidate confusion." There was no confusion. She knew what she was doing was wrong. Another interesting piece of information that was not reported in the story is the fact that her father, Steve, works for Focus on the Family, Dobson's gang of fascists. Extremist fundies will do anything to advance their agenda. Shame!

Plagiarism is not the issue here. Fundies will use words spoken or written by other fundies without citing them. They swallow their lies whole and then vomit them up to prove their point. The bible quotes are clear. I don't find anything spiritual or hidden in them.

I was trying to present an analogy with what Paszkiewicz would have done if Matthew had put the recording device in the open. Paszkiewicz knew what he was doing (preaching in a public school classroom) was wrong. If he saw the recorder he would not have said anything controversial in that class. This does not mean that he would do this in every class. In the next class he would start preaching again. Putting the recorder in plain view would have solved nothing. What Matthew did was courageous. Confronting power always has risks. I applaud him for doing what he did.

In his cage? Imagine this, if a thief has a record for robbing convenience stores and he wants to rob another. He goes into the store and sees that there are a few police officers in the store. Does he go ahead and try to rob that store? No he simply finds another convenient store to rob.