High school history teacher confuses religion with history
Categories: Teens & tweens, Development, Media, Education
According to David Paszkiewicz, evolution isn't scientific, there were dinosaurs on Noah's ark, and, of course, if you're not a Christian, you're not getting into heaven. At least, that's what he told his class while, unbeknownst to him, student Matthew LaClair was taping him. Matthew said that he was uncomfortable with his new teacher's comments, so he taped eight classes beginning in the middle of September.Paszkiewicz, who was supposed to be teaching about the constitution, not violating it, also happens to be a youth pastor at Kearney Baptist Church. Interestingly, this didn't happen in Alabama or Georgia or some other bible belt state, but in New Jersey, a mere ten miles from Manhattan. What's even stranger is the community response -- strongly supporting the teacher, despite the evidence of his proselytizing. 15-year-old Kyle Durkin, said, for example, "I'm on the teacher's side all the way."
Another student in the class and, coincidentally, a member of Paszkiewicz's youth group, Greice Coelho, said in a letter to The Observer, the local weekly newspaper, that Matthew was "ignoring the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which gives every citizen the freedom of religion." Unfortunately, she must have missed the times -- if any -- when Paszkiewicz actually talked about the constitution. Sure he has the right to his beliefs, but as a representative of the government teaching in a public school, he needs to save them for his church youth group. Some have called for Matthew's suspension and he has even received a death threat.
This is another case of a teacher not quite getting it. Paszkiewicz is perfectly within his rights to believe whatever he wants. He's even free to share those beliefs as if they were the truth in the context of his church. But when he sets foot in a public school classroom, he is an employee and representative of the government and has to keep those beliefs to himself. If that's not something he feels he can do, then he needs to find other employment, perhaps as a teacher in a private, religious school.
Recent Posts
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (7/03/2009)
- Lush Lashes (7/03/2009)
- Abigail Breslin Makes $13 a Week (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jessica 12-20-2006 @ 12:56PM
Right On, Roger! As a high school history teacher, I am appalled at his lack of professaionalism......and his lack of knowledge on historical matters such as separation of church and state.
Reply
Christine 12-20-2006 @ 1:36PM
Death threat?? Umm... extreme.
Reply
Stephanie 12-20-2006 @ 2:00PM
I was thinking that the person sending the death threat really needs to take a better look at their own faith.
As for the teacher, he really needs to understand how inappropriate his proselytizing is utterly inappropriate in the classroom, even if most of the community has no problem with it. It isn't fair to those who aren't so comfortable.
Reply
Katheryn 12-20-2006 @ 9:32PM
I agree that the teacher was out of line, and should be dealt with accordingly, but I also wonder why the student didn't say anything to the teacher. Instead of voicing his concerns he taped 8 lectures? Sounds to me like this kid wanted the teacher to get fired instead of giving him the chance to change the way he was teaching.
Reply
Uly 12-21-2006 @ 1:27AM
Katheryn, do you think, given the tone of the speeches (and the fact that the community is supporting the teacher instead of the student) that talking to the teacher would have been productive?
Reply
Brynne 12-21-2006 @ 7:49AM
I find it interesting that you used a distinctly Catholic image even though the teacher in question is a Baptist who would most likely wholegeartedly disagree with the Marian devotion of the rosary.
Reply
Uncle Roger 12-21-2006 @ 4:19PM
Brynne, I'm not sure why you'd find that interesting? I'll admit that it shows my ignorance of the Baptist brand of religion, but I chose that image simply because it screamed "religion!" to me and thus it seemed appropriate.
Reply
oneofGod'schildren 2-24-2007 @ 10:04PM
I might bemisiunderstood about this, but I don't see why it can be innappropriate, because, in the constitution, the first ammendment is that you have religious, and whatever else rights, right. It goes back to the problem of taking, "UNDER GOD," out of the Pledge of Alligence. Its absolutly absurd, when you believe your following your country, when you are obviously not, and you don't even see!
Reply