KHS Teacher Controversy

[Guest good lord]

people like "godfearing" really give religion a bad name.

[Guest Peter Barber]

1. Matthew did not provoke anything. […]

2. Matthew did complain to the principal, […]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Someone accused Paul LaClair earlier in this thread of outright rudeness in his replies.

Having now read the thread as far as Paul's comment quoted above, I can only assume that the accuser has not done so, or has mistaken Paul LaClair for someone else. Paul has impressed me by his calm and respectful tone, his good reasoning, his willingness to address the issues raised, and his refusal to bring his personal religious beliefs (or lack of them) into the discussion - in contrast to many of his interlocutors. This in itself is very eloquent.

As I'm not from Kearny (or indeed the USA) I will not intrude any further on KOTW, and just say one last thing:

Feel free to save souls for Christ in the classroom instead of teaching history, and preach Genesis instead of teaching science, if you don't mind your skilled jobs steadily moving overseas, and your society becoming steadily more repressive. But I for one, as a UK citizen, am seriously worried for the future of your country - and consequently mine - if you do.

[Guest Guest]

*you're* an idiot. (you are)

[Guest Paul]

Matthew LaClair, get a life. You are looking for publicity, why I don't know considering you have nothing to offer the public.

GOD BLESS YOU ANYWAYS you scrawny lil bast1rd.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Funny, I call him that all the time.

[Guest Paul]

This whole thing is the teachers fault.

With the taxes that are paid in Kearny for the schools, can't we hire teachers who know how to discuss these issues with in the guide lines for acceptable discussions about sensitive subjects. 

With all his degrees this teacher had no common sense.

As to Mathew, I think he did the right thing going to the newpapers. As usual in Kearny I am sure this whole mess would have been swept under some rug or hidden in some closet with the rest of the skeletons. It is about time that the powers to be are called on the carpet to do what we pay taxes for.

Teach inforce the rules that exist and not make them up as they go along to suit their agendas.

Kudos to You and your family Mathew and don't back down maybe you can teach a few people that they can not do whatever they want.

Come to think about it.. the teacher must have been speaking about the Current Board of Ed and The Mayor and Council who all think they are GODS!

Does Santos Have his picture hanging on Town Hall yet?

Do you think he had anything to do with evolution?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I appreciate your support, but protest your comments about Mayor Al Santos. I say protest, not merely disagree, because your suggestion is just wrong. The mayor has no control over this. The town has no control over the Board of Education and the school administration. They are completely separate entitlies.

Too bad, because if Al had jurisdiction, this would have been resolved long ago. Al Santos is one of the finest public servants I have ever met. He works tirelessly for the good of his community at great personal sacrifice to himself. He single-handedly brought civility and professionalism to a town council that often looked more like a troop of mud wrestlers. And while Kearny still has its political corruption, obviously, Al is as good as it gets, here or anywhere. You're free to disagree with or even dislike him, but please don't blame him for something he has no control over.

[Guest jmc]

Religion at no time belongs in a public school, and neither do tape recorders.

Both were dead wrong!.

Can't believe the attention it drew. Well I guess I should not consider FOX news attention.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Given the response from the locals about his complaint, imagine if he didn't record it. In that environment it is clear that he needed the tapes to defend himself and it was very smart to do so.

[Guest Guest]

I respectfully disagree with your characterization of the teacher's behavior. Paszkiewicz did not "veer" into religious discussions. He launched into an extended proselytizing session. He was on an evangelical mission, he as much as said so in class. Like it or not, there is no place for this in a public school in the USA. It is a violation of the Constitution, and even those organizations that support teachers' freedom to express their religious views have acknowledged that Paszkiewicz was clearly wrong in this case.

Furthermore, it is not the student's duty to tell the teacher he is out of line. The Supreme Court of the US has stated this specifically in Engel v. Vitale, the school prayer case from 1962. So not only does it make sense, it's the law. The student has every right --- legally, morally and ethically --- to make a record of a teacher this far out of line, and submit it to the proper authorities. The teacher is in a position of public trust. What he will do in one class is an example of what he will do in any other. A grown man whining about being set up by a sixteen-year-old student has a few things to learn about moral responsibility.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

After hearing more recordings, I feel that Mr. Paszkiewicz has greater difficulty in separating his own personal beliefs from a high school history class curriculum than I initially thought.

I do feel he did more than veer into religious discussion in the first recording I heard, but I wanted to reserve judgement before knowing more about his teaching style. I mean, nobody's perfect. But after hearing more, I do not feel this was an isolated incident. Mr. Paszkiewicz seems more clearly in the wrong to me now. For me, it is not so much a question of morals than the fact that I believe Mr. Paszkiewicz to be a poor example of critical thinking. That in itself comes with a whole parcel of personal failings, some of which you describe. Nonetheless, I agree completely with you when he voices his beliefs of who belongs in hell.

The only thing I wondered about Laclair's actions was why he did not object when Paszkiewicz asked the students if they felt comfortable with the direction of the discussion. It just seemed to my ears that Laclair helped further the discussion than voice opposition to it. Certainly, this does not absolve Paszkiewicz by any means, and I hope the accusations in other posts do not color this one to imply anything beyond that simple thought.

[Guest an American in Texas]

Peter Barber said "Feel free to save souls for Christ in the classroom instead of teaching history, and preach Genesis instead of teaching science, if you don't mind your skilled jobs steadily moving overseas, and your society becoming steadily more repressive. But I for one, as a UK citizen, am seriously worried for the future of your country - and consequently mine - if you do. "

Amen, my British brother. Even if you don't give a damn about the Constitution . . . and I emphatically do . . . you folks should realize that a repressive theocracy will be not competitive in the global economy. As a Christian, I love Genesis as a metaphor for the Divine's creative power, but I certainly realize that it is not, and was never intended to be, a science text.

Christianists are foolish on two scores. First, they look to their own flawed understanding of the Word while ignoring (and indeed lying about) the reality of Creation. Second, they bring dishonor to the Name through their own trashy behavior, so clearly evidenced by some of the putzes posting here. What a shabby witness to the Prince of Peace, folks!

Leigh Williams

Austin, Texas

[Guest exholt (Ken)]

I say this kid and his family are assholes looking to make some money and trying to get national attention.Them and everyone who agrees with teaching about evolution and nothing else in school are idiots also. All you dumb and ignorent people will be sorry when you are in front of GOD and will be held acountable for not teaching nor believing the truth that this life and world as we know it comes from one true devine entity. It will be to late to be sorry then. As the old saying goes "you reap what you sow" I will pray for you though. I pray someday all will know   the truth and the truth is the one and only living GOD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Such harshly judgemental attitudes reminds me not of a genuine follower of Jesus, but the very Pharisees he frequently criticized in his day.

Are you a modern day Pharisee who hypocritically demands strict compliance from others while failing to observe such compliance yourself through your words and actions?

Can any credibility be attached to those who proclaim their Christian faith by using rude and foul language like "asshole"?? Whenever people use foul words such as that, the lack of basic respect this language manifests is such that they should be censured lest they are misled to believe such disrespect is socially acceptable.

Moreover, it is disturbing to see quotes such as "you reap what you sow" as it is often used by those who take anticipated glee in the "imminent" downfall of their perceived opponents. I sincerely doubt Jesus would be taking pleasure from the sufferings of others, even if it is caused by their own errors.

You sir, are one of the worst spokesmen for the teachings of Jesus Christ and a reason why so many non-Christians are turned-off to Christianity.

[Guest Guest]

Look what they're saying at Christian Forums. These are mainly Christians posting.

http://www.christianforums.com/t4181971-te...ng-in-hell.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

QUOTE(FSA @ Nov 25 2006, 12:10 PM)

Paul,

Are you an atheist?

Why do you think that is relevant?

Are you a Christian fundamentalist? Is it relevant? What assumptions are you making?

Think about it.

[Guest Concerned Father]

Dear Paul,

It must be terrible to see your son attacked so publicly, and to read threats made against him. As a father I can understand your need to defend him, however, I would humbly suggest that you and your son need to stay above the fray.

Commenting on a web forum to each angry or hateful message will diminish your dignity and almost certainly lead to your words being twisted. Worse still you may end up saying something in a hurry that you may regret later.

An article/ letter to the local paper or a national daily will be a much more effective means of getting your views heard.

All the best.

[Guest Calybos]

I say this kid and his family are assholes looking to make some money and trying to get national attention.Them and everyone who agrees with teaching about evolution and nothing else in school are idiots also. All you dumb and ignorent people will be sorry when you are in front of GOD and will be held acountable for not teaching nor believing the truth that this life and world as we know it comes from one true devine entity. It will be to late to be sorry then. As the old saying goes "you reap what you sow" I will pray for you though. I pray someday all will know   the truth and the truth is the one and only living GOD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Really? So where in the Bible does it say that we'll all be judged on whether we accept leading scientific theories about the development of life? I could've sworn our salvation was supposed to hinge on things like goodness and charity and faithfulness.

Will we need to bring #2 pencils?

[Guest Paul]

The only thing I wondered about Laclair's actions was why he did not object when Paszkiewicz asked the students if they felt comfortable with the direction of the discussion.  It just seemed to my ears that Laclair helped further the discussion than voice opposition to it.  Certainly, this does not absolve Paszkiewicz by any means, and I hope the accusations in other posts do not color this one to imply anything beyond that simple thought.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Most respectfully, it doesn't matter. Any student might have asked him these questions. What matters are not the questions from the student, whomever that student may have been, but the teacher's response. What the teacher did in response to those questions, whatever their source, indicates what he would do on any other day in that classroom. He is in a position of public trust; the student is not. He crossed the legal line; the student did not. He is supposed to have control of his classroom; suggesting that the student baited him ignores the relative responsibilities of the students and the teacher.

Paszkiewicz raised the subject, and Matthew asked challenging questions, perhaps questions Paszkiewicz had never considered. He would have asked those same questions whether the recorder was running or not. Paszkiewicz had no right to raise the subject, but once he did, Matthew had every right to challenge him. Paszkiewicz responded as you heard. It's no defense to the teacher, and no valid criticism of the student, that the student was capable of asking intelligent questions that put the teacher on the spot in a discussion the teacher initiated because he wanted to "make disciples of all men." These were the teacher's very words in that classroom.

In short, what the student did does not diminish the teacher's fault by one iota, so it's not relevant to the only issue that is of public concern. At best your argument against Matthew is that he was not being consistent, but even that doesn't hold water: his teacher stepped way over the line, and Matthew challenged him on it, with the recorder running. All perfectly legal and perfectly appropriate.

In other words, if you're in a position of public trust, don't do things you can't defend, and don't whine about it if someone lets you keep doing them for a while before turning you in.

[Guest Skepticus]

Firstly, I would like to offer my regards and encouragement to the LaClair family. Please keep up the good work, even though I am not an American, these issues are a sign of the times that have import in the whole world community. A community that is far too sparcely populated with pricncipaled people of reason and courage, such as yourselves. Matthew. You should consider going into politics. You're a good lad.

To the moderate christians who have voiced condemnation of Mr. Paszkiewiczs' actions and recognising the bigger issue, of educating our future generations, free of bigoted religious indoctrination by stealth and emotional blackmail, many kudos for the respect and maturity you have bought to the debate. It should serve to remind us that the real enemy in this case, is not religion per se, but evangelical dogmatism and bigitory itself. Some people will twist things in their own mind, anyway they can to justify crusades and support the crusaders who stand accused of Going too far.

Consider the following post by Daniel. Did I miss an earlier post announcing a competition for who could write the most inane, ass-backward and ignorant post? Why is it that ignorant fundementalists never seem to have read and comprehended these kind of debates? Why is it that they spout such innane, illinformed drivel that it chalenges the composure of even the most tollerent, forgiving and reasonable mind?.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I hope the teacher wins.

This student needs to learn to be more tolerant of other's beliefs.

NO! Daniel. That is exactly why Mr. Paszkiewicz has been called out. It is because he was caught teaching his own INTOLLERANT beliefs to his class. Unless you and I are reading two totaly different stories here, lets get one thing straight. Neither Matthew or his dad (Paul), have attempted to condem Mr. Paszkiewicz for his beliefs.

The issue is that he was teaching those beliefs in a school history class, thats one thing and secondly, that his invocation of eternal damnation in hell is tantamount to emotional blackmail. It dosn't get much clearer cut, without dragging in a pulpit, donning a cloak and physicaly thumping a bible while preaching his sermon to these kids. Whatever his beliefs are, he has no right briniging them into a history class and exploiting their impressionable minds as their entrusted (government employed) teacher.

If it is his teacher's belief that Jesus was the Son of God and came on behalf of mankind to atone for their sins and that everyone should know that they have been forgiven because of what Christ did, then I do not blame him for sharing his faith with people he meets.

And if instead, he belived that the Invisible Pink Unicorn (which created the universe) sent fairies into the enchanted garden to make the fairy dust of faith, so that we could have unlimited fortune and atune our harmonic ressonance with the holistic light of utopian trancendence... Do you then belive he should share his faith?

He is not shareing his opinion with visitors in his own home, or people he has bumped into on the street. He is acting as a trusted representative of the government education system, and violating that trust by PREACHING his beliefs to the exclusion of all other doctrines, as well as contradicting established scientific facts. You seem to be saying that just because he has these beliefs he should be allowed to "share his faith" He can believe whatever cockamamie thing he wishes for whatever cockamamie "reasons" he likes but his job is to teach history in a formal established curriculum.

Your biased evaluation of the situation Daniel, paints the picture that the people he was addressing, were casual aquaintences in an open forum. WRONG!! These young people were his students, whom he has been entrusted to care for and educate. The forum is a classroom where he is employed to teach established facts about our world. Whatever your understanding of the word "faith" it doesn't corelate to anything that belongs in a school classroom. He was not just stating his beliefs incidentaly either, as your interpretation sugests. He was damning anybody to hell who didn't accept salvation. And again he didn't just mention God in passing he done a fully fleged funementalist sales pitch that consumed almost the entire lesson.

Because we disagree with God on many issues, and we're treated like we're all his children, and he does things to try and draw us back. But we can't disagree with him on salvation. Either he paid the price or he didn't - if you reject his gift of salvation, you're going where you belong.

What inteligable meaning can "sharing your faith" have anyway? Faith is something you come to in a personal manner, it's not a bag of crisps. Your mealy mouthed uphemism for "indoctrinating impressionable minds" is willfully ignorant of other peoples worldview. Something about which you could obviously care less, because you yourself probably share Mr. Paszkiewiczs' absurd beliefs. No?

It's his belief that he should do so.

And it's my belief (based on well reasoned ethics) that he shouldn't. Put aside the fact that it's illegal, it is also immoral to undermine the developing mind of adolescent children by indoctrinating them with this stupefying dogma, before they have fully develeped their reasoning facaulties.

That being said, the student suing the teacher...

WRONG

I don't recall anybody talking about sueing anybody. Paul has clearly detailed his expectations and they are very reasonable, involving an apology and procedures to ensure these things never happen again.

...for talking about something...

WRONG

Try, for emotional blackmail, indoctrination and villification of dissenting views.

...that was not in line with his own beliefs...

WRONG

NO!!! NO!!! NO!!! NO!!! NO!!!... It is because it violates the constitution that Matthew has taken a stand. You can't possibly have read and comprehended any of the material preceeding your ignorant post, if you would come here and spout such stupid nonsense. Matthews, beliefs are not on trial, nor are Mr. Paszkiewiczs' beliefs The actions of Mr. Paszkiewicz are being scrutinised as uncostitutional.

...attacks the teacher's beliefs.

WRONG

Matthew is not atacking Mr. Paszkiewiczs' beliefs. I know it must be hard with a dogma stunted IQ, but try to understand there is a difference between, Mr. Paszkiewicz holding a belief and Mr. Paszkiewicz prostlysing that belief in school, as a teacher.

You see... This is what religion does to you brains people!! So far Daniel, your contribution has been a succesion of stupid remarks.

Honestly Daniel your reasoning skills are attrocious. For the effort you have put into following this story, understanding it, and providing a cogent thought out response, you might just have well blown a rassberry with your thumb on your nose and chanted "Nyaaa nyaaa nyee nyaaa nyaaa" Did you even listen to the audio or read the transcript?

If Matthew can't handle someone else having beliefs other than his, and has to take the issue to court, then he needs some help. 

I'll tell you who needs help, it is narrow minded, dogmatic biggots such as yourself, who can't even read plain text in front of their face without twisting the facts to suit their dogma infected minds. Matthew has taken a stand against somebody (namely Mr. Paszkiewicz) who "can't handle someone else having beliefs other than his". It is the very thing that you accuse Matthew of, "intollerance" that he is standing up against. It is the very thing that Mr. Paszkiewicz is accused of. Nobody here bar the seriously deluded, is even considering this in any other terms than whether or not Mr. Paszkiewicz is guilty of intollerence, indoctrination, prostelysing etc.

Why is it that fundemenalist Christians don't understand simple fact that their religious belief is a contradiction of other beliefs? Why is it that they can never see or comprehend, that by saying "this scripture is the unaliable word of the one and only true God", they are contradicting another persons beliefs and insulting them also? School is not where somebody should go to hear a teachers (or anybody elses) deluded ramblings. It is where they go to learn facts and skills they will need in the real world.

Now you and Mr. Paszkiewicz can believe what ever deluded fantasy you choose Daniel, I honestly don't give a rats fanny. The reason I support Matthew, is because I am apposed to religious indoctrination of innocent minds. It is religious fundementalism itself, that breeds intollerance an hatred, because it espouses absolute beliefs to the exclusion of all others. Paszkiewicz was intollerant to other beliefs and worldviews by espousing his delusions of damnation in hell, and projecting that scenario onto his students. This is an insult to Muslems, Hindus, Buddhists and even moderate Christians, but especialy athiests, because unreasoned faith is anathema to free-thinking athiests.

Instead of spending all of his time talking to daddy's lawyer, this kid should be talking to daddy's therapist.

Look you nutcase. Matthews' father is a lawyer himself. Exactly how much of this story did you read? And it's you who should be talking to a therapist... through a small window in a padded cell. Hey!! I just thought of an alternative use for churches after religion has been put in it's place. (OK... mabee just the evangelical chapters)

Once again many thanks and kudos to the LaClair family. The world is watching. Hi from Australia.

~~~~~~~ If you don't prey in my school, I won't think in your church. ~~~~~~~

PS: A note to Christians:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It would be hard to imagine a more ideal scenario, for testing the line that could be drawn between fundementalist and a moderate Christianity. Anybody sidding with the LaClair family obviously has ethics and justice at heart. Anybody standing with Paszkiewicz is clearly a dogmatic fundementalist with an evangelical adjenda to the exclusion of other faiths, athiests and moderates alike. If a battle over religion in schools must be waged (and it does seem timely), It might do the world good to draw battle lines that include moderate people of many faiths including christians along with athiests and agnostics etc, on one side and fundementalist zealots on the other. If religion itself is not the problem, then reasonable people of faith should hear a clarion call to fall in alongside people of goodwill and reason to protect education.

[Guest jd]

This kid did the right thing and ought to be congratulated.

The teacher is not there to preach Christianity. If he had been preaching Islam, the same people who malign the student for recording would be calling him a hero.

Well done young man!!

[Guest G]

Which part of "Separation of Church and State" do you not understand?

[Guest Guest]

I say this kid and his family are assholes looking to make some money and trying to get national attention.Them and everyone who agrees with teaching about evolution and nothing else in school are idiots also. All you dumb and ignorent people will be sorry when you are in front of GOD and will be held acountable for not teaching nor believing the truth that this life and world as we know it comes from one true devine entity. It will be to late to be sorry then. As the old saying goes "you reap what you sow" I will pray for you though. I pray someday all will know   the truth and the truth is the one and only living GOD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

just don't pull the pin on that bomb you have hidden under your burkah, dude...

America has its quote of ERIC RUDOLPH pharisee christians.

[Guest NJBorn]

The teacher is not there to preach Christianity.  If he had been preaching Islam, the same people who malign the student for recording would be calling him a hero.

Exactly right. Many of the people posting here in support of the teacher are ignoring the central issue, which is the obvious impropriety of the teacher's remarks in a public school setting during regular classroom instruction time. His statements were improper as a matter of law, pure and simple. The fact that his statements concerned Judeo-Christian religious beliefs has predictably brought out those who believe their religious faith is under fire in our society. But the law is decidedly neutral on that score. It matters not whether his statements involved matters of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, or some other religious faith. The same constitutional principles would apply, and his statements would in all such circumstances have been equally improper.

[Guest Guest]

If that teacher had started saying that the Holocaust never happened, or that blacks were genetically inferior to whites, or that AIDS is a government conspiracy to destroy the black race, he'd be out on his a** faster than a speeding bullet.

But his radical religious views, common to the radical Theocrats trying to take over the United States, allow him to get away with his predatory behavior without repercussion.

He should be fired.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

... out of a cannon, into a pot of boiling sul... oh sorry I was thinking out loud. Not serious you realise.

[Guest Guest]

Most respectfully, it doesn't matter. Any student might have asked him these questions. What matters are not the questions from the student, whomever that student may have been, but the teacher's response. What the teacher did in response to those questions, whatever their source, indicates what he would do on any other day in that classroom. He is in a position of public trust; the student is not. He crossed the legal line; the student did not. He is supposed to have control of his classroom; suggesting that the student baited him ignores the relative responsibilities of the students and the teacher.

Paszkiewicz raised the subject, and Matthew asked challenging questions, perhaps questions Paszkiewicz had never considered. He would have asked those same questions whether the recorder was running or not. Paszkiewicz had no right to raise the subject, but once he did, Matthew had every right to challenge him. Paszkiewicz responded as you heard. It's no defense to the teacher, and no valid criticism of the student, that the student was capable of asking intelligent questions that put the teacher on the spot in a discussion the teacher initiated because he wanted to "make disciples of all men." These were the teacher's very words in that classroom.

In short, what the student did does not diminish the teacher's fault by one iota, so it's not relevant to the only issue that is of public concern. At best your argument against Matthew is that he was not being consistent, but even that doesn't hold water: his teacher stepped way over the line, and Matthew challenged him on it, with the recorder running. All perfectly legal and perfectly appropriate.

In other words, if you're in a position of public trust, don't do things you can't defend, and don't whine about it if someone lets you keep doing them for a while before turning you in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I see your point that even if no student wanted to object, even if the students furthered the discussion as Laclair did, what Paszkiewicz did was wrong. I imagined if Paszkiewicz had offered students alcohol. The responsibility lies solely with Paszkiewicz, even if a student goes along with it. In this regard, I completely agree.

The quibble I had with Laclair was little more than a thought I was trying to resolve, not really a criticism. I hope it wasn't taken as such. The idea of consistency probably describes the way I was thinking on the matter, but Laclair's objection or lack thereof are completely irrelevant with regards to Paszkiewicz's behaviour.

If anything, that little hang up I had speaks to the fact that it was hard for me to position Laclair as merely a minor in a high school classroom.

[val]

Which part of "Separation of Church and State" do you not understand?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I found this article in an upstate Ny paper where the writer Carl Strock was making fun of Christians and as all media does ,using his paper to make HIS point and promte HIS views. Although I do not live in New Jersey I had to take the time to commend the many citizens of Kearny for standing behind the teacher . This liberally raised child is pushing things as far as he can go and needs to be put in his place. His parents should be ashamed of him, but than as you always see it, the apple does not roll far from the tree. We are at War and I know of many communities that were hard hit by the casualities of 9-11 in that area. To have a child refuse to stand up for the pledge of allegiance, would be unheard of years ago. You might even hear the word Treason, a word seldom used today.Christmas IS the birth of Christ ...thus the words CHRIST mas...I am sure any additonal words the teacher spoke was to this little snot nose who probably egged him on. We can't sit back and let these type of people ruin our country. Good for you Mr. Paszkiewicz!!!! Stand your ground. Many of the silent majority are behind you. The media and liberal idiots are trying to keep what is right silenced.This is the first time I have written a letter but it won't be my last.

[Guest Coolgamer]

1 Corinthians 1:18-19  "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.  For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Proverbs 4:7

Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

[Guest EngTeach]

I say this kid and his family are assholes looking to make some money and trying to get national attention.Them and everyone who agrees with teaching about evolution and nothing else in school are idiots also. All you dumb and ignorent people will be sorry when you are in front of GOD and will be held acountable for not teaching nor believing the truth that this life and world as we know it comes from one true devine entity. It will be to late to be sorry then. As the old saying goes "you reap what you sow" I will pray for you though. I pray someday all will know   the truth and the truth is the one and only living GOD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do so enjoy you calling other people ignorant when your own vocabulary and spelling could use some work. There's hardly any point in praying to God if he can't understand you.

[Guest Coolgamer]

Genesis 19:32-36

Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose. Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

Luke 14:26

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

Matthew 10:34

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Mark 4:25

For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath. -- The US Republican Party motto

Corinthians 11:5

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

[Guest YWN]

Back in my day someone would have a foot up this young gentlemans ass.

Probably a parent.

Not today.

So Sad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So sad that we don't physically abuse children? Holy cow, you don't sound like much of a christian.