A student of uncommon courage

[Guest Guest]

Exactly. How dare he out-think and outmaneuver the teacher. How dare he stop him from getting away with abusing young minds. How dare he challenge those minds to think in a way they've apparently never been asked to think before, and obviously don't wish to think. How dare he have a different idea, and horror of horrors, use that idea to beat the odds and challenge the assumptions of nearly everyone else in that building. How dare he stand up to power. How dare he face down the administration, the Board of Education and his classmates. How dare he challenge the educational system to keep its promises.

The least he could do is have the decency to lose. How dare he win.

"And after it rains there's a rainbow,

And all of the colors are black.

It's not that the colors aren't there.

It's just imagination they lack."

  ---  Paul Simon, "My Little Town"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess it is easy to win with an army of lawyers in your back pocket. And for the record, he didn't win, or even come close.

[Strife767]

Really? Why sould anyone listen to any thing spewed from a no good son of a B**ch like you?

I think you need to pray more.

Either take YOUR ass in to combat or STFU!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because military service is the only way one is any good to his country, right? What a foolish statement.

Last I checked, upholding the legal foundation of this country kinda helps, too.

[Strife767]

Being an American is not tossing the Constitution in everyone's face

A real American wouldn't NEED to have the Constitution shoved in their face for him or her to understand and respect it.

for the purpose  of your and your "precious son's" personal gain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fact: Matthew would have gotten zero recognition/awards/accolades had it not been for a teacher stupid enough to preach in class and dishonest enough to try and lie his way out of it.

[Strife767]

How did young Matthew Win?  YOU little piece of dog poo.

Wow.

Mr. P,  which he sought so much to dismiss,

Paul has explicitly stated the exact OPPOSITE of the above throughout the entire course of events, moron.

[Strife767]

The people of this town already know the facts. What you post here is pure lies.

Cite a few of these lies. Put up or shut up.

Nice to know I won't be seeing you in hell.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's like saying "Nice to know I won't be seeing you in Neverland."

[Strife767]

Wow Paul you have done it....

No matter what you come back with when you quote my post and rebuttle it..

This man just compared his sons' actions to those of 18 and 19 year olds in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said they are both Heroes...

This proves he is a sick man...

What? "Hero" can mean lots of different things to different people. If someone gets a cat down from a tree, they might be considered a "hero" by the cat's owner. It doesn't mean that him and a member of the military are EXACTLY THE SAME. Both people like Matthew and people serving in the armed forces are a credit to their country.

[Strife767]

And you would know this first hand since you are Matthew LaClair.

Proof or gtfo.

In this blog

This is a forum, not a blog.

you have pissed so much on Constitution

Cite an example of me expressing a view that is in direct contradiction with the Constitution if you can.

trying to defend this boy that you forget what it really stands for.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now I'm really curious--why don't you enlighten me on what the Constitution "really stands for?"

[Bern]

And what a great show of patriotism when the people of this country stand and remove our hats for the Pledge of Allegiance to show support of the United States of America and all that it has done for us and one snot nosed individual and his unruly parent sits and does nothing to try to make a name for themselves. That is not what the forefathers of this country would have ever tolerated. Then they try to toss the Constitution in our faces and call them heroes?  There are certain moral and ethical issues of yours that no matter what money or fame you are going after make people so very sick of Matthew and Paul LaClair.  Put that in your movie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Our forefathers did not have this issue since they did not have the pleadge of allegiance.

[Strife767]

Mr. LaClair and junior are such cowards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Let's see you defend the Constitution in the face of overwhelming opposition, and even a threat to your life.

What do you know about courage?

[Strife767]

Okay, that was weird.

If that wasn't a LaClair, they should call the FBI because he has a stalker.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dude, these were the top 10 results from Google, the most popular search engine on the Internet. If you think that's stalking, then maybe you're just stupid. It's not exactly confidential what that person posted.

[Strife767]

And what a great show of patriotism when the people of this country stand and remove our hats for the Pledge of Allegiance

BECAUSE IF I MAKE THE WORDS STAND OUT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, IT MIGHT MASK HOW EMPTY THEY ARE

Reciting a couple dozen words has no effect. It's just chanting--that's not patriotism. Action is where patriotism can be found.

[Guest Paul]

And what a great show of patriotism when the people of this country stand and remove our hats for the Pledge of Allegiance to show support of the United States of America and all that it has done for us and one snot nosed individual and his unruly parent sits and does nothing to try to make a name for themselves. That is not what the forefathers of this country would have ever tolerated. Then they try to toss the Constitution in our faces and call them heroes?  There are certain moral and ethical issues of yours that no matter what money or fame you are going after make people so very sick of Matthew and Paul LaClair.   Put that in your movie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The best guide to what our country's forefathers would have done is what they did. If they had thought a Pledge of Allegiance was important, they would have written one themselves. They did not. So while neither of us can speak for men who are long dead, these men were individualists to the core, and their writings strongly suggest that they would have been on our side of this issue, not yours. I don't think you begin to appreciate the revolutionary character and independence of our founding fathers.

It is your insistence on universal participation in a ritual that would shock these great men of conscience.

How's that. I can shout as loudly as you can, I can do it in purple, and I can even think while I'm doing it, not that the shouting makes the argument any better.

There's nothing new about what you're doing. Challenges to conformity are always met with virulent, usually unthinking opposition. But the fact remains that there's nothing unruly about sitting quietly while others participate in a ritual.

Another inescapable fact is that there's more patriotism in studying the issues and voting than in reciting a few words. No one should have to choose between the two, but when you are so vicious in your attacks, you leave us little choice but to make the point that forced rituals are meaningless and in fact destructive. It is only when such displays are freely given that they mean anything. You've made the Pledge a forced act, and by so doing you've done what we would never want to do: you've destroyed it.

[Bryan]

The best guide to what our country's forefathers would have done is what they did. If they had thought a Pledge of Allegiance was important, they would have written one themselves. They did not.

Would Paul accept this argument regarding the 14th Amendment?

So while neither of us can speak for men who are long dead, these men were individualists to the core, and their writings strongly suggest that they would have been on our side of this issue, not yours.

What a blowhard.

[Guest Paul]

I guess it is easy to win with an army of lawyers in your back pocket.  And for the record, he didn't win, or even come close.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Call it what you like, the Anti-Defamation League is coming to Kearny starting next week to train the teachers on these issues. The teachers will be imparting that information to the students, and in addition other programs are scheduled. If you don't want to call that winning, that's up to you, but it accomplishes what we asked for from the beginning.

So we're satisfied, and you can call it what you want. We'll call it a win and you don't have to. Enough.

[Guest Guest]

The best guide to what our country's forefathers would have done is what they did. If they had thought a Pledge of Allegiance was important, they would have written one themselves. They did not. So while neither of us can speak for men who are long dead, these men were individualists to the core, and their writings strongly suggest that they would have been on our side of this issue, not yours. I don't think you begin to appreciate the revolutionary character and independence of our founding fathers.

It is your insistence on universal participation in a ritual that would shock these great men of conscience.

How's that. I can shout as loudly as you can, I can do it in purple, and I can even think while I'm doing it, not that the shouting makes the argument any better.

There's nothing new about what you're doing. Challenges to conformity are always met with virulent, usually unthinking opposition. But the fact remains that there's nothing unruly about sitting quietly while others participate in a ritual.

Another inescapable fact is that there's more patriotism in studying the issues and voting than in reciting a few words. No one should have to choose between the two, but when you are so vicious in your attacks, you leave us little choice but to make the point that forced rituals are meaningless and in fact destructive. It is only when such displays are freely given that they mean anything. You've made the Pledge a forced act, and by so doing you've done what we would never want to do: you've destroyed it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why would it shock them? They participted in many universal rituals. They united the nation under one flag among other things. Something you consider just an arbitrary symbol.

Whom do you refer to as us?

[Guest Guest]

But the fact remains that there's nothing unruly about sitting quietly while others participate in a ritual.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But has Matthew always sat quietly during the Pledge? Not from what I have heard.

[Bryan]

Call it what you like, the Anti-Defamation League is coming to Kearny starting next week to train the teachers on these issues.

People from your side were whining about a statement on church-state separation that I posted--to which the ADL was signatory.

The teachers will be imparting that information to the students, and in addition other programs are scheduled.

Too bad they didn't start with young LaClair last year. Perhaps he would have realized that his complaint had no merit. At the very least he might have resisted his claim in the meeting with Somma and the others that Paszkiewicz had no right to express a religious opinion in class.

If you don't want to call that winning, that's up to you, but it accomplishes what we asked for from the beginning.

Be careful what you wish for.

So we're satisfied, and you can call it what you want. We'll call it a win and you don't have to. Enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you were really satisfied would you still be taking the time to post about it?

[Guest Guest]

Dude, these were the top 10 results from Google, the most popular search engine on the Internet. If you think that's stalking, then maybe you're just stupid. It's not exactly confidential what that person posted.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, okay, so then Strife posted them. Makes sense.

[Guest Guest]

Let's see you defend the Constitution in the face of overwhelming opposition, and even a threat to your life.

What do you know about courage?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought he had overwhelming support?

[Guest Guest]

Call it what you like, the Anti-Defamation League is coming to Kearny starting next week to train the teachers on these issues. The teachers will be imparting that information to the students, and in addition other programs are scheduled. If you don't want to call that winning, that's up to you, but it accomplishes what we asked for from the beginning.

So we're satisfied, and you can call it what you want. We'll call it a win and you don't have to. Enough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul - quick question - why the Anti-Defamation League? Aren't they a pro-religious organization whose primary goal is to counter anti-Sematism? I know they have secondary goals, but those goals don't seem to be focused on Establishment Clause/Separation issues. It would seem that there would be another organization better suited to serve the goals of what we're trying to teach the faculty. Or do you have a relationship with someone there who has an expertise in this sort of thing?

[Guest Paul]

Why would it shock them? They participted in many universal rituals.  They united the nation under one flag among other things.  Something you consider just an arbitrary symbol. 

Whom do you refer to as us?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yet again you're making it up. Every nation on earth has a flag. You will not find anything I've written or anything I've said against it, because I haven't.

Having a flag is not the same thing as forcing children to stand and recite words they don't understand from the time they're five until they're eighteen. The framers wouldn't be shocked by a ritual. They would be shocked that an American citizen can claim to stand for freedom, then force the ritual on someone who chooses not to participate in it. They would be shocked that you don't understand what makes a democracy work --- it's not reciting a few words. In fact, doing that just gives you cover that you've done your civic duty for the day, when in fact you haven't done a thing to help your country if that's all you've done. You don't get it. That's what they'd be shocked about.

Who are you?

[Guest Paul]

But has Matthew always sat quietly during the Pledge?  Not from what I have heard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then you heard wrong. Remember, this would be coming from the same kids who claim Paszkiewicz wasn't preaching in class, so they're not very credible. If there was anything to say, it would have been said long ago. It's possible Matt may have been standing on occasion doing something else, just as I was on one occasion when the Pledge was recited while I was headed back to my seat. In fact I do recall him mentioning that he was in the middle of doing something one day when the pledge started, but he was never disruptive. He understands that's part of the deal, and from everything I've seen he is unfailingly respectful.

Have you people nothing better to do than try to nitpick at my son? You'd like to have a reason to criticize him, but you don't have one so you make stuff up.

He exposed your boy for what he is. He exposed the game and put a stop to it. And so you're mad. Get over it.

[Guest Paul]

Paul - quick question - why the Anti-Defamation League?  Aren't they a pro-religious organization whose primary goal is to counter anti-Sematism?  I know they have secondary goals, but those goals don't seem to be focused on Establishment Clause/Separation issues.  It would seem that there would be another organization better suited to serve the goals of what we're trying to teach the faculty.  Or do you have a relationship with someone there who has an expertise in this sort of thing?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The ADL was chosen because in the opinion of the Board and its attorney, they had the best program for delivering this information. We examined it and concurred.

A significant part of the history behind the ADL's involvement in church-state issues is that the plaintiffs who challenged school prayer in the 50s and 60s were mostly Jewish. Jewish children attending public schools were being forced into Christian prayer. They finally got sick of it, took it to the Supreme Court and won. (In fact, Matthew and I will be meeting Ellery Schempp, the plaintiff in one of the most famous cases on school prayer, in a few weeks.) Out of that history came the ADL's interest in these issues. They developed a curriculum, which is solid on the law and also the science. It was the quality of the curriculum that resulted in the choice.

[Guest Paul]

I thought he had overwhelming support?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He did, all over the world. But not in Kearny. Kearny followed the Pied Piper.

[Guest Guest]

Then you heard wrong. Remember, this would be coming from the same kids who claim Paszkiewicz wasn't preaching in class, so they're not very credible. If there was anything to say, it would have been said long ago. It's possible Matt may have been standing on occasion doing something else, just as I was on one occasion when the Pledge was recited while I was headed back to my seat. In fact I do recall him mentioning that he was in the middle of doing something one day when the pledge started, but he was never disruptive. He understands that's part of the deal, and from everything I've seen he is unfailingly respectful.

Have you people nothing better to do than try to nitpick at my son? You'd like to have a reason to criticize him, but you don't have one so you make stuff up.

He exposed your boy for what he is. He exposed the game and put a stop to it. And so you're mad. Get over it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ask Matt if he has ever been spoken to by a principal about the need for him to sit quietly during the pledge and not do things like tap his pencil or hum out loud.

I doubt you will get a truthful answer.

And Paszkiewicz is not "my boy". I disagree with everything he did here.