Jump to content

The Muslim student P thinks is bound for hell


Guest Paul
 Share

Recommended Posts

On September 15, 2006, the class was discussing Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians may be received into heaven. One female student in particular protested, only to be essentially shut down by Mr. P. The following exchange ensued:

i. [september 15, 2006, 14:55-*] {student} “Muslims have no choice, they have no other education, like . . .” {Paszkiewicz} “Yeah, I feel bad for them. . .” . . . . {student} [16:14-*] “Let’s go ask (Student X).” {Paszkiewicz} “(Student X), yeah, and see, there’s another case in point, I love (Student X), she’s on my crew, and on some of my best boats, and probably will be on my best boat this year. But I am bound to what I believe, if you ask me a direct question, I’m not going to hide it from you.”

When confronted with this in Mr. Somma's office, Mr. Paszkiewicz adamantly denied it, as follows:

ii. [Oct. 10, 2006, 6:26-6:36] {Paszkiewicz} “A student brought up (Student X), and I said ‘Let’s stop it right now,’ I said ‘(Student X)’s a wonderful girl and she’s on my crew team, and I will not have anybody talking about her.’” [6:50-6:53] {Matthew} “But then you continued to use the name.” {Paszkiewicz} “No I didn’t.”

Well, yes he did. He did eventually stop the class from using this girl's name, but only after he had issued his judgment, "talking about her" himself. So not only did his statement in Mr. Somma's office not conform to the facts; he was a hypocrite in class.

I didn't use that term "hypocrite" publicly without solid justification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On September 15, 2006, the class was discussing Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians may be received into heaven. One female student in particular protested, only to be essentially shut down by Mr. P. The following exchange ensued:

i. [september 15, 2006, 14:55-*] {student} “Muslims have no choice, they have no other education, like . . .” {Paszkiewicz} “Yeah, I feel bad for them. . .” . . . . {student} [16:14-*] “Let’s go ask (Student X).” {Paszkiewicz} “(Student X), yeah, and see, there’s another case in point, I love (Student X), she’s on my crew, and on some of my best boats, and probably will be on my best boat this year. But I am bound to what I believe, if you ask me a direct question, I’m not going to hide it from you.”

When confronted with this in Mr. Somma's office, Mr. Paszkiewicz adamantly denied it, as follows:

ii. [Oct. 10, 2006, 6:26-6:36] {Paszkiewicz} “A student brought up (Student X), and I said ‘Let’s stop it right now,’ I said ‘(Student X)’s a wonderful girl and she’s on my crew team, and I will not have anybody talking about her.’” [6:50-6:53] {Matthew} “But then you continued to use the name.” {Paszkiewicz} “No I didn’t.”

Well, yes he did. He did eventually stop the class from using this girl's name, but only after he had issued his judgment, "talking about her" himself. So not only did his statement in Mr. Somma's office not conform to the facts; he was a hypocrite in class.

I didn't use that term "hypocrite" publicly without solid justification.

It actually amazes me what an bigot you are. Mr. Paszkiewicz is trying to stop the conflict instead of furthering the discussion in chat. It is that same conflict that you keep trying to bring up. If there is anyone who is appears to hate the Muslims, it's you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On September 15, 2006, the class was discussing Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians may be received into heaven. One female student in particular protested, only to be essentially shut down by Mr. P. The following exchange ensued:

i. [september 15, 2006, 14:55-*] {student} “Muslims have no choice, they have no other education, like . . .” {Paszkiewicz} “Yeah, I feel bad for them. . .” . . . . {student} [16:14-*] “Let’s go ask (Student X).” {Paszkiewicz} “(Student X), yeah, and see, there’s another case in point, I love (Student X), she’s on my crew, and on some of my best boats, and probably will be on my best boat this year. But I am bound to what I believe, if you ask me a direct question, I’m not going to hide it from you.”

When confronted with this in Mr. Somma's office, Mr. Paszkiewicz adamantly denied it, as follows:

ii. [Oct. 10, 2006, 6:26-6:36] {Paszkiewicz} “A student brought up (Student X), and I said ‘Let’s stop it right now,’ I said ‘(Student X)’s a wonderful girl and she’s on my crew team, and I will not have anybody talking about her.’” [6:50-6:53] {Matthew} “But then you continued to use the name.” {Paszkiewicz} “No I didn’t.”

Well, yes he did. He did eventually stop the class from using this girl's name, but only after he had issued his judgment, "talking about her" himself. So not only did his statement in Mr. Somma's office not conform to the facts; he was a hypocrite in class.

I didn't use that term "hypocrite" publicly without solid justification.

Well? Where are Mr. P's apologists on this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Patriot
On September 15, 2006, the class was discussing Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians may be received into heaven. One female student in particular protested, only to be essentially shut down by Mr. P. The following exchange ensued:

i. [september 15, 2006, 14:55-*] {student} “Muslims have no choice, they have no other education, like . . .” {Paszkiewicz} “Yeah, I feel bad for them. . .” . . . . {student} [16:14-*] “Let’s go ask (Student X).” {Paszkiewicz} “(Student X), yeah, and see, there’s another case in point, I love (Student X), she’s on my crew, and on some of my best boats, and probably will be on my best boat this year. But I am bound to what I believe, if you ask me a direct question, I’m not going to hide it from you.”

When confronted with this in Mr. Somma's office, Mr. Paszkiewicz adamantly denied it, as follows:

ii. [Oct. 10, 2006, 6:26-6:36] {Paszkiewicz} “A student brought up (Student X), and I said ‘Let’s stop it right now,’ I said ‘(Student X)’s a wonderful girl and she’s on my crew team, and I will not have anybody talking about her.’” [6:50-6:53] {Matthew} “But then you continued to use the name.” {Paszkiewicz} “No I didn’t.”

Well, yes he did. He did eventually stop the class from using this girl's name, but only after he had issued his judgment, "talking about her" himself. So not only did his statement in Mr. Somma's office not conform to the facts; he was a hypocrite in class.

I didn't use that term "hypocrite" publicly without solid justification.

Is there no relief from this endless bloviation. Would it be not Christian of me to wish this guy carpel tunnel ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It actually amazes me what an bigot you are.  Mr. Paszkiewicz is trying to stop the conflict instead of furthering the discussion in chat. It is that same conflict that you keep trying to bring up.  If there is anyone who is appears to hate the Muslims, it's you.

So let me get this straight. The discussion is on Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians can go to heaven. A student (not Matthew) brings up a particular girl everyone knows, who is a Muslim. Mr. Paszkiewicz gives his opinion that she will be condemned to hell unless she accepts Jesus, THEN shuts down the discussion. And you think that's OK, just because he eventually said let's not talk about particular people AFTER HAVING DONE SO HIMSELF. By what convoluted rationale is that acceptable behvaior? Isn't it like the only adult eating his fill, then telling the kids they have to ration the remaining food, so they can't have any yet? If not, why not?

Oh, and how do you get around the fact that he not only expressed his religious opinion in a public school classroom, but did it with reference to a specific student everyone knows? This is completely out of bounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there no relief from this endless bloviation.

Using big words doesn't make you right, especially if you use them incorrectly.

Would it be not Christian of me to wish this guy carpel tunnel ??

I dare say there is nothing Christian about you. Any reasonable Christian would be disgusted with your antics, and ashamed for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Kardinal Mom
On September 15, 2006, the class was discussing Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians may be received into heaven. One female student in particular protested, only to be essentially shut down by Mr. P. The following exchange ensued:

i. [september 15, 2006, 14:55-*] {student} “Muslims have no choice, they have no other education, like . . .” {Paszkiewicz} “Yeah, I feel bad for them. . .” . . . . {student} [16:14-*] “Let’s go ask (Student X).” {Paszkiewicz} “(Student X), yeah, and see, there’s another case in point, I love (Student X), she’s on my crew, and on some of my best boats, and probably will be on my best boat this year. But I am bound to what I believe, if you ask me a direct question, I’m not going to hide it from you.”

When confronted with this in Mr. Somma's office, Mr. Paszkiewicz adamantly denied it, as follows:

ii. [Oct. 10, 2006, 6:26-6:36] {Paszkiewicz} “A student brought up (Student X), and I said ‘Let’s stop it right now,’ I said ‘(Student X)’s a wonderful girl and she’s on my crew team, and I will not have anybody talking about her.’” [6:50-6:53] {Matthew} “But then you continued to use the name.” {Paszkiewicz} “No I didn’t.”

Well, yes he did. He did eventually stop the class from using this girl's name, but only after he had issued his judgment, "talking about her" himself. So not only did his statement in Mr. Somma's office not conform to the facts; he was a hypocrite in class.

I didn't use that term "hypocrite" publicly without solid justification.

Paul- Are you aware of the fact that the Muslim girl doesnt like you using her as your "pawn"?

Are you aware of the fact that she is very happy that Mr. P is her teacher and coach?

Shame on you for using an innocent child for your personal vendetta!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
So let me get this straight. The discussion is on Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians can go to heaven. A student (not Matthew) brings up a particular girl everyone knows, who is a Muslim. Mr. Paszkiewicz gives his opinion that she will be condemned to hell unless she accepts Jesus, THEN shuts down the discussion. And you think that's OK, just because he eventually said let's not talk about particular people AFTER HAVING DONE SO HIMSELF. By what convoluted rationale is that acceptable behvaior? Isn't it like the only adult eating his fill, then telling the kids they have to ration the remaining food, so they can't have any yet? If not, why not?

Oh, and how do you get around the fact that he not only expressed his religious opinion in a public school classroom, but did it with reference to a specific student everyone knows? This is completely out of bounds.

Have you realized that your son's cds (the first ones) have this girl's name and you just can't stop talking about her? She is a minor and the only person who keeps talking about this girl is you. If you had any respect for her, her family and her religion you would shut up and stop talking about her. It is not her fault that your son didn't care about her and her name is everywhere for people to listen to. Calling her student X is not helping because we all know who she is...If nothing else, Mr. LaClair, show some respect to this girl! Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight. The discussion is on Mr. Paszkiewicz's belief that only Christians can go to heaven. A student (not Matthew) brings up a particular girl everyone knows, who is a Muslim. Mr. Paszkiewicz gives his opinion that she will be condemned to hell unless she accepts Jesus, THEN shuts down the discussion. And you think that's OK, just because he eventually said let's not talk about particular people AFTER HAVING DONE SO HIMSELF. By what convoluted rationale is that acceptable behvaior? Isn't it like the only adult eating his fill, then telling the kids they have to ration the remaining food, so they can't have any yet? If not, why not?

Oh, and how do you get around the fact that he not only expressed his religious opinion in a public school classroom, but did it with reference to a specific student everyone knows? This is completely out of bounds.

Fascinating that this is the one that has Mr. P's apologists all but silent. An admission of his culpability on this point from at least one of you would be mildly refreshing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul- Are you aware of the fact that the Muslim girl doesnt like you using her as your "pawn"?

Are you aware of the fact that she is very happy that Mr. P is her teacher and coach?

Shame on you for using an innocent child for your personal vendetta!

Doesn't matter. Mr. Paszkiewicz had no right doing that. If she's not offended, that's up to her, but the statement by Mr. Paszkiewicz was still outrageous and is still wrong.

By the way, how is she our pawn? I haven't used her name. Mr. Paszkiewicz did, and he did it publicly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you realized that your son's cds (the first ones) have this girl's name and you just can't stop talking about her? She is a minor and the only person who keeps talking about this girl is you. If you had any respect for her, her family and her religion you would shut up and stop talking about her. It is not her fault that your son didn't care about her and her name is everywhere for people to listen to. Calling her student X is not helping because we all know who she is...If nothing else, Mr. LaClair, show some respect to this girl! Thank you!

If I had it to do over again, I would have deleted her name from the original recordings we distributed. To that extent, you're right. We did delete the multiple mentions of her name from the recording of the October 10 meeting, and her last name has never been made public so I doubt that anyone outside Kearny is likely to find out who she is unless someone from within Kearny deliberately identifies her.

However, the fact is, she was brought up publicly in the classroom, by name, by classmates, not Matthew. That's not a private setting. Mr. Paszkiewicz used her name twice in rendering his judgment. Why is no one upset about this girl being spoken of in class at all in that fashion? It should never have been done in the first place.

Perhaps what's really bothering you is that you cannot defend Mr. Paszkiewicz's conduct. Notice your response: You don't even try. So instead, you try to shift the blame to the people who exposed it. The people who used this girl's name, especially the teacher in saying that she is doomed to hell, should have recognized the possible consequences of that action, and not used her name in that way in the first place. I just admitted that I should have done this differently. When will Mr. Paszkiewicz admit that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you realized that your son's cds (the first ones) have this girl's name and you just can't stop talking about her? She is a minor and the only person who keeps talking about this girl is you. If you had any respect for her, her family and her religion you would shut up and stop talking about her. It is not her fault that your son didn't care about her and her name is everywhere for people to listen to. Calling her student X is not helping because we all know who she is...If nothing else, Mr. LaClair, show some respect to this girl! Thank you!

By the way, since you know who this girl is, do you think any less of her because of what has been said?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Don't apologize
If I had it to do over again, I would have deleted her name from the original recordings we distributed. To that extent, you're right. We did delete the multiple mentions of her name from the recording of the October 10 meeting, and her last name has never been made public so I doubt that anyone outside Kearny is likely to find out who she is unless someone from within Kearny deliberately identifies her.

However, the fact is, she was brought up publicly in the classroom, by name, by classmates, not Matthew. That's not a private setting. Mr. Paszkiewicz used her name twice in rendering his judgment. Why is no one upset about this girl being spoken of in class at all in that fashion? It should never have been done in the first place.

Perhaps what's really bothering you is that you cannot defend Mr. Paszkiewicz's conduct. Notice your response: You don't even try. So instead, you try to shift the blame to the people who exposed it. The people who used this girl's name, especially the teacher in saying that she is doomed to hell, should have recognized the possible consequences of that action, and not used her name in that way in the first place. I just admitted that I should have done this differently. When will Mr. Paszkiewicz admit that?

Mr. P has the balls to make a statement like "you belong in hell" when he coaches this girl. The Muslim community should come out in support of your son. What makes America great is our ability to practice our religion freely. We preach that to the world and in our own community we do nothing to a teacher who in the name of Jesus espouses hatred. Mr. P should apologize to the community and ask for forgiveness. His zealot attitude about Jesus flies in the face of what Jesus stood for.

Where are the Muslim community leaders? I'd love to see them out in force at the next Board of Education meeting. "Jesus saves" or is it "Mohamad saves"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
If I had it to do over again, I would have deleted her name from the original recordings we distributed. To that extent, you're right. We did delete the multiple mentions of her name from the recording of the October 10 meeting, and her last name has never been made public so I doubt that anyone outside Kearny is likely to find out who she is unless someone from within Kearny deliberately identifies her.

However, the fact is, she was brought up publicly in the classroom, by name, by classmates, not Matthew. That's not a private setting. Mr. Paszkiewicz used her name twice in rendering his judgment. Why is no one upset about this girl being spoken of in class at all in that fashion? It should never have been done in the first place.

Perhaps what's really bothering you is that you cannot defend Mr. Paszkiewicz's conduct. Notice your response: You don't even try. So instead, you try to shift the blame to the people who exposed it. The people who used this girl's name, especially the teacher in saying that she is doomed to hell, should have recognized the possible consequences of that action, and not used her name in that way in the first place. I just admitted that I should have done this differently. When will Mr. Paszkiewicz admit that?

You should have done it, but you didn't. What is upset is that you can't stop talking about her. I don't think you know Mr. P, Paul!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should have done it, but you didn't. What is upset is that you can't stop talking about her. I don't think you know Mr. P, Paul!

I would know him if he had responded to my invitation to work this out, which I made nearly three months ago. No doubt he has done many wonderful things for many people. The problem is, he has his own personal version of hell, reserved apparently for homosexuals, non-Christians, assorted deviants (as he might define and term) and perhaps a few others. So instead of practicing universal brotherhood, he seems to practice selective brotherhood based on his judgment of people (very nearly in the sense of a final judgment), which misses two major points of Christianity as I see it. I know him in this situation, and his conduct here has been, and still is, abominable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
You should have done it, but you didn't. What is upset is that you can't stop talking about her. I don't think you know Mr. P, Paul!

He doesn't know him. He never once went to talk to him.

Thank God for the people that does know Mr. P. and knows that he

is not the kind of person Paul is painting him to be.

And for the ones that does not know him keep in mind that Paul has an agenda.

His goal is to tarnish Mr. P.'s name and destroy his reputation.

Before you buy into what Paul has spread, go talk to Mr. P., he is a great guy and very approachable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't know him. He never once went to talk to him.

Thank God for the people that does know Mr. P. and knows that he

is not the kind of person Paul is painting him to be.

And for the ones that does not know him keep in mind that Paul has an agenda.

His goal is to tarnish Mr. P.'s name and destroy his reputation.

Before you buy into what Paul has spread, go talk to Mr. P., he is a great guy and very approachable.

Really? I thought he just wanted him to admit his mistake, apologize and promise not to do it again. Then everyone could move on. Why hasn't Mr.P done this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesn't know him. He never once went to talk to him.

Thank God for the people that does know Mr. P. and knows that he

is not the kind of person Paul is painting him to be.

And for the ones that does not know him keep in mind that Paul has an agenda.

His goal is to tarnish Mr. P.'s name and destroy his reputation.

Before you buy into what Paul has spread, go talk to Mr. P., he is a great guy and very approachable.

Someone I know once said "No one can make a fool out of you. You can only make a fool out of yourself." Mr. P's defenders seem to forget that Mr. P is being harmed by his own words. I have no power to paint him. His own words and actions paint him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Someone I know once said "No one can make a fool out of you. You can only make a fool out of yourself." Mr. P's defenders seem to forget that Mr. P is being harmed by his own words. I have no power to paint him. His own words and actions paint him.

I guess is Mr. P. that has the media on speed dial? I don't think so.

You are the one that has been in every news broadcaster, you are the one taking you son to visit schools out of this area to talk about this and looking to recruit support. Because you know here the only support your get is from Strife and the mayor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before you buy into what Paul has spread, go talk to Mr. P., he is a great guy and very approachable.

Then why did he ignore my invitation to speak and work a miracle together? That is exactly how I put it to him. Why don't you ask him why he ignored the invitation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...