The Worcester (MA) Telegram has an article about Matt LaClair, the courageous young man who recorded his history teacher flagrantly violating the constitution, telling students that they had to believe in Jesus or they would burn in hell and much more. The sad thing about his story is that so few people in his community were on his side. Most people took the side of the teacher, who was obviously wrong. Speaks volumes about our culture, I think.
Profile
Ed Brayton is a freelance writer and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media.(static)
Search This Blog
Recent Comments
- Jaime A. Headden on Bill O'Reilly: Proof of God's Existence
- crf on Were Legislators Threatened with Martial Law?
- DingoJack on More McCain Campaign Follies
- Paul Murray on More McCain Campaign Follies
- Prof. Bleen on Possible Republican Voter Fraud
- Gerry L on More McCain Campaign Follies
- FastLane on Freshwater Hearing Updates
- FastLane on Freshwater Hearing Updates
- kehrsam on Freshwater Hearing Updates
- Quid on Were Legislators Threatened with Martial Law?
Sb/DonorsChoose Drive
Thanks!
Recent Posts
- Caldwell Loses Another Lawsuit
- Were Legislators Threatened with Martial Law?
- Possible Republican Voter Fraud
- Freshwater Hearing Updates
- More McCain Campaign Follies
- McCain in Iowa
- Detroit Crime Lab Closed
- Bill O'Reilly: Proof of God's Existence
- Million Comment Parties
- Good Ol' Klingenschmitt
Blogroll
Science Blogs
- The Panda's Thumb
- Carl Zimmer
- The Austringer
- Evolution Blog
- De Rerum Natura
- Evolving Thoughts
- Preposterous Universe
- Butterflies and Wheels
- John Lynch
- Unscrewing the Inscrutable
- NCSE's Legal Blog
- Red State Rabble
- Thoughts From Kansas
- Appellate Blog
- Volokh Conspiracy
- Jack Balkin
- Legal Theory Blog
- ACS Blog
- Reason and Liberty
- Overlawyered
- Supreme Court Times
- Positive Liberty
- Reason's Hit and Run
- Andrew Sullivan
- Talking Points Memo
- Daily Kos
- Media Matters
- Patterico's Pontifications
- Classical Values
- Virginia Postrel
- Jim Anderson
- Strange Doctrines
- John Scalzi
- The Pryhills
- Temperantia
- Rev. Spork
- Electric Commentary
- Two Aarons
- Farkleberries
- Paul Phillips
- Henry Neufeld
- Talk.Origins
- Talk.Reason
- Antievolution.org
- National Center for Science Education
- Talk.Design
- Michigan Citizens for Science
Archives
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- November 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- August 2004
- July 2004
- June 2004
- May 2004
- April 2004
- March 2004
- February 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- November 2003
Other Information
Ed Brayton also blogs at Positive Liberty and The Panda's Thumb
Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Pilot Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.
Ed's Audio and Video
YearlyKos 2007
Video of speech on Dover and the Future of the Anti-Evolution Movement
Audio of Greg Raymer Interview
E-mail Policy
Any and all emails that I receive may be reprinted, in part or in full, on this blog with attribution. If this is not acceptable to you, do not send me e-mail - especially if you're going to end up being embarrassed when it's printed publicly for all to see.
My Ecosystem Details
Subscribe via Email
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Jesse Helms: Cross Dresser? | Main | Day 2 Report »
Matt LaClair's Story
Category: Politics
Posted on: July 18, 2008 9:30 AM, by Ed Brayton
Find more posts in: 
Politics
Comments
I find that the more people there are who believe in X the more likely it is that X is total bullshit.
Posted by: BaldApe | July 18, 2008 10:11 AM
Wow, this is the first I've heard of this story and I must say that it is rather eye-opening for me. I know that this stuff happens every day in the U.S. but what surprises me is where it happened. I do not know anything about Kearny, NJ but it is only about 10 miles from Manhattan. I would have thought that anything within 50 miles of Manhattan would have too much "blue" influence to let this sort of thing happen.
To Mr. LaClair, bravo!
Posted by: sdg | July 18, 2008 10:25 AM
It says a lot about our Christian culture indeed. It means that people in this community are God fearing Christians, who respect the Lord and the principles our great Christian nation was founded on. The people of this community know that "separation of church and state" is a lie designed by the supreme court to rob our country from its Christian identity.
Posted by: SteveP | July 18, 2008 10:35 AM
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpost.html
Posted by: sdg | July 18, 2008 10:42 AM
It also says a lot about our Christian culture when they don't realize that "Separation of Church and State" is at least as much about protecting the religious from the government as it is about protecting the rest of us from the religious. If there was no separation of church and state, and the US had adopted a state religion (as was typical at the time the nation was founded), I do not think that the state religion would have been any of the ones that are currently the most successful and widespread. They would instead have been suppressed in favor of the state religion, which would probably have then been reduced to the impotent shadows that the state religions of Europe have mostly become. Having your religion cosy up to the government may seem like a good idea to the religious at first, but over time the government will ultimately subsume and destroy their church - not intentionally or maliciously, but simply because that is the nature of governments. No, the churches should be all in *favor* of rigorous separation of church and state, it is the key to their continuted existence.
Posted by: tceisele | July 18, 2008 10:47 AM
Hoping SteveP is taking the piss in his post, but on the off chance he's serious....
"Our" Christian identity? While I may still identify as a Lutheran (ELCA, you know, the liberal beer-loving ones), I am most certainly not Christian as most people would recognize it and really dislike it when a tight-assed minority tries to foist its medieval values on me.
It's bloody sociopathic to think that such a personal thing as religion trumps the rights and values of everyone around you, and it's time these folks learned that lesson.
Posted by: G Barnett | July 18, 2008 10:49 AM
Every time someone makes the claim that the US is a "Christian" nation I'm reminded of the wording in the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by John Adams in 1797 ...
"As the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen [Muslims] ... it is declared ... that no pretext arising from religious opinion shall ever product an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries....
"The United States is not a Christian nation any more than it is a Jewish or a Mohammedan nation."
-- Treaty of Tripoli (1797), carried unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams (the original language is by Joel Barlow, US Consul)
One might think that Adams would have a pretty clear picture of the founding of the US.
Posted by: Dave | July 18, 2008 11:20 AM
So, SteveP: Christian, huh? Catholic or protestant? Episcopalian or baptist? Baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord? Original baptist church of god, or reformed baptist church of god? Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?
Posted by: Dunc | July 18, 2008 11:25 AM
I am a member of the Greater Worcester Humanists and was present at Matt LaClair's talk, which took place at our annual Summer Outing. While what initially happened to LaClair was bad enough, the really sad part of the story is what the reporter for the Worcester T&G did when he wrote this article.
The reporter is normally the religion reporter for the paper and in every article I have read by him, he puts a pro-religion spin in place. That he was sent to cover LaClair's presentation is already a demonstration of the T&G's lousy judgment.
I have written in my own blog about the major discrepancies between what LaClair said at the presentation and what reporter Bronislaus Kush claims that he said. The irony of the situation is that Kush entirely omitted substantial comments by LaClair about the bias against him that he encountered in the media... and Kush continues that bias by misquoting LaClair in several key points.
I wrote an account of the Greater Worcester Humanist outing including comments about LaClair's presentation at Hyphoid Logic. In the fourth paragraph of that article is a link to the T&G coverage by Kush (the bias of which should be evident from the title alone!) and the sixth comment to the article is mine and details a few of the ways in which Kush misrepresented key points in LaClair's presentation.
Posted by: Mike O'Risal | July 18, 2008 11:30 AM
BaldApe said:
"I find that the more people there are who believe in X the more likely it is that X is total bullshit."
Everybody believes that. ;D
Posted by: Gingerbaker | July 18, 2008 12:28 PM
Not only has this been ignored inthe press, but it'sunlikely to generate as many posts as the discussion about what a jackass PZ Myers is.
Oh, well. Even among the ScienceBloggers, talking about "celebrities" is more interesting than what real people are doing to defend their integrity.
Posted by: Spike | July 18, 2008 12:38 PM
Here's a clue. 'God-fearing' is code for 'people-hating'.
If you want to catch up on hatred in America, get a copy of Intelligence Report (any issue) from Southern Poverty Law Center. You will be ashamed to be an American.
Posted by: Bill the Cat | July 18, 2008 12:50 PM
Spike: People only referred to the PZ thing because it was the elephant in the room; when an individual well respected and influential in a sub-community makes a comment which gets, not only picked up by the wider culture, but viciously attacked by it (though, to be fair, it was only acknowledged because Donahue went bonkers over the cracker issue), then the members of that community feel it necessary to respond.
Take Mr. Brayton's comments on the issue. Mr. Brayton and Mr. Myers don't always agree with one another, and rarely mention one another in their blogs (though when they do so its usually amicably). Yet, given the row produced by this issue, and the fact that few people felt the need to actually find out what really happened (Catholic kid showing a communion wafer to his friend and being mobbed by the overreacting paranoids of his congregation), Mr. Brayton commented on it. At no point was it about publicity or celebrity, it was just an old-fashioned usenet rumble that got blown out of proportion.
Posted by: Julian | July 18, 2008 1:24 PM
@Spike
literacy: FAIL.
how many times has Ed linked to stories about this? did you read the latest (which was pretty poorly written, btw, at least make an effort to call the teacher, jackass though he is) cuz it mentioned the controversy even appeared in the NYT for fuck's sake. who ignored this? i'm eeeeeeeeeeevil msm by day (boo! hiss!) but enough with the mindlessly reflexive news bashing. you sound as bad as the fox news trolls and just as uninformed.
Posted by: khefera | July 18, 2008 1:54 PM
I have been following Matt's story from the beginning. Matt is a very intelligent and very courageous young man. I have been in contact with his father, Paul, who was gracious enough to send me copies of the recordings Matt made. At the time the tapes were made there were no school regulations about recording in class but the board adopted a "no recording" policy after this story broke.
The comments made by the teacher were disgusting. In his meeting with Matt and the principal the teacher lied several times and then blew up when Matt revealed that he had recorded the comments. The teacher said something like "Okay you've got me. You got the big fish." The teacher is still claiming that he did nothing wrong.
Posted by: wrpd | July 18, 2008 1:57 PM
Dave posted this. "Every time someone makes the claim that the US is a "Christian" nation I'm reminded of the wording in the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by John Adams in 1797 ..."
John Adam's opinion on that treaty is meaningless. The fact that the founders and framers quoted from the Bible 34% of the time on their writings, is proof enough that they founded our country on Christian principles. To deny our Christian heritage, through this lie of "separation of church and state," leads to the manufactured controversies like this one. The teacher did nothing wrong, and the community supports this teacher. It seems those that want to deny America's Christian heritage, also want to deny the Will of the People!
Posted by: SteveP. | July 18, 2008 2:15 PM
Care to comment on Jefferson's letter? I posted a link to it above.
Posted by: sdg | July 18, 2008 2:30 PM
Nobody cited John Adams' opinion of the treaty, only the fact he signed it into law. Need I remind you that the Constitution states (Article VI:
It doesn't matter if early statesmen of America were all Fundamentalist Christians, or Jews, or atheists, or Scientologists. The fact remains they established, quite deliberately, a secular government.
Posted by: DaveL | July 18, 2008 2:34 PM
see what i did there? i quoted it but then i said it was stupid. and it's about 35% of this post. i'm so confused now. is this a pro-christian post???
Posted by: sdg | July 18, 2008 2:40 PM
SteveP's 34% wasn't pulled out of his ass. David Barton pulled it out of his. There was a study done that showed that in the printed articles from around the time of the revolution 34% of them contained quotes from the bible. What Barton doesn't say is that 75% of all printed articles from this time were published sermons by christian preachers. When you take the sermons out of the equation, the percentage drops significantly.
Posted by: wrpd | July 18, 2008 2:52 PM
Poe.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | July 18, 2008 2:55 PM
SteveP is a moron. But I do agree with him that separate of church and state is a sham. The Founders intended that religions as practiced by Americans of low moral standards and intelligence should be controlled by the guidance of superior men. Congress should create an Office of Religious Correction, which determines who is qualified to preach and promulgates correct doctrine. Government monitors should be sent out to churches, (and I would certainly have to include SteveP's church in this mission, based on his statements deviating from True Constitutional Principles), to record and analyze their doctrine and liturgy. Re-education should be applied to first and minor offenders; major offenders should be expatriated to their country of origin. This sort of unAmerican behavior cannot be tolerated in our country. Our TCPs are under grave attack by these individuals of low IQ and limited attachment to reason and truth. Let these people go back to Europe and foment multi-decade conflicts, as is their wont.
Posted by: Lew | July 18, 2008 2:56 PM
Notice that under SteveP, though, "printed articles from around the time of the revolution" got morphed into the writings of the "founders and framers".
Lying for Jesus.
Posted by: DaveL | July 18, 2008 2:57 PM
As other have pointed out and will no doubt continue to point out, America is not a Christian nation. But even accepting, just for sake of argument, that you are correct and the nation was founded on Christianity, you really don't see that the teacher did anything wrong?
Seriously, I don't know what denomination you belong to, but wouldn't you get upset if the teacher, or any teacher, told your child, while captive in their class, that anyone who is not a Calvinist is going to Hell? Or anyone who's not a Baptist or a Moonie? What if the teacher had said that anyone who does not believe in geocentrism and a flat Earth is going to Hell? In short, what if you're kids are not the "right kind of Christians" according to their history teacher.
Do you really see nothing wrong with a teacher proselytizing?
Posted by: MyPetSlug | July 18, 2008 2:57 PM
Posted by: sdg | July 18, 2008 3:23 PM
I wholeheartedly oppose the "will of the people" if it involves fascism.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | July 18, 2008 3:31 PM
And since only half of the bible deals with Christ, then only 17% of the writings of our founders and framers are of christian origin* (if one trusts Barton's idiocy).
*This post contains less than 10% recycled christian principles and can be used in other products.
Posted by: JimNorth | July 18, 2008 4:05 PM
SteveP, David Barton is a liar for Jesus. His "Wallbuilders" propaganda has been thoroughly debunked by real historians.
Rather than rely on the specious nonsense of proselytizers, I urge you to read the writings of the Framers themselves. You'll soon find out that, far from being the evangelical Christians the Religious Right pretends they were, the Framers were deeply committed to setting up a secular . . . that is, religiously neutral . . . republic.
Please, read the primary documents. You'll see for yourself.
Posted by: Leigh | July 18, 2008 4:30 PM
Apparently, Christian Nations, under God, have a problem limiting their earthly weapons systems. "I believe in God, and an ordinance equipped drone."
Regardless of what we were, we must certainly be a Christian Nation NOW, considering how much writing is dedicated to discussion of God, eh, Steve P. The evidence is overwhelming, even if the logic is less so.
Posted by: B8ovin | July 18, 2008 4:42 PM
All too often, the "will of the people" is fascism (See my first comment).
Posted by: BaldApe | July 18, 2008 5:18 PM
I'm hoping SteveP is a Poe, but I'm deathly afraid that he isn't.
Posted by: Adrienne | July 18, 2008 5:40 PM
I don't understand all the personal attacks most of you have leveled against me. I am simply stating facts. This is a Christian Nation with a strong Christian Heritage, and this teacher did nothing wrong, but to uphold that heritage. This nation is the product of Christian values, and it doesn't matter how Court "construes" the first amendment, separation of church and state is a myth. And this myth is used to attack our Christian traditions. Remember, James Madison said "Religion is the basis of all government."
Posted by: SteveP | July 18, 2008 6:09 PM
SteveP wrote:
Which would be relevant if anyone had quoted Adams' opinion on a treaty; they quoted the treaty itself - negotiated under Washington, signed by Adams and ratified unanimously by a Senate that still included many of the men who actually wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And that treaty bluntly declares that America "is not in any way founded upon the Christian religion."
Well, it might be...except this claim is total bullshit. The Lutz study, which is where this ridiculous statistic allegedly came from, says nothing even remotely like this - no matter how many times David Barton lies about it. The documents that Lutz examined were not all, or even mostly, writings by the founding fathers. In fact, 75% of all the Biblical references in the study came from sermons reprinted as pamphlets. And during the time of the writing and ratification of the constitution, 1787 and 1788, every single Biblical reference he found was from an anti-federalist arguing against the passage of the constitution based on some Biblical principle.
The will of the people does not trump the constitution. If you really think that there's nothing wrong with a public school teacher telling a Muslim student that they're going to hell if they don't convert to Christianity, during class time, in front of her fellow students, you're out of your mind.
No he didn't. This is just another lie repeated over and over. If you can find that actual quote anywhere in Madison's writings, I'll send you a check for $500. If you can't, I'll settle for you just coming back and admitting you were wrong. But you can't find it (because it doesn't exist, he never said it) and I doubt you'll admit you were wrong.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | July 18, 2008 7:00 PM
Remember, James Madison said "Religion is the basis of all government."
Fair warning dude, you're in a gunfight with a butter knife.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | July 18, 2008 7:00 PM
stevep: you wouldn't know a fact if it flew up your ass. A fact is something that can be proved from a reliable source. Show me the fucking sources.
Posted by: wrpd | July 18, 2008 7:09 PM
SteveP, here is the actual quote from Madison's _Memorial and Remonstrance_: "Because finally, 'the equal right of every citizen to the free exercise of his RELIGION according to the dictates of conscience' IS held by the same tenure with all his other rights. If we recur to its orgin, it is equally the gift of nature; if we weigh its importance, it cannot be less dear to us; if we consider the 'Declaration of those rights which pertain to the good people of Virginia, as THE BASIS AND FOUNDATION OF GOVERNMENT,' it is enumerated with equal solemnity, or rather studied emphasis." Guess you kind of altered the meaning, moron.
This is a Secular Nation, and there are people from many religious and non-religious traditions that co-exist here. The term "Christian Nation" is a slogan that some people, you among them I suspect, use as justification for entitlement to special privileges, rights, and attention. The Constitution says you and your friends are no better or more important than the rest of us. Your bible, tracts, sermons, apologia, justifications, etc. do not overrule equality before the law.
Posted by: Lew | July 18, 2008 7:10 PM
The Worcester T&G is notoriously right wing (a Boston Herald analog if you will). Kush's reporting is no surprise.
Worthless rag, and the lack of effort the editors put into it is reflected in the content. A big favorite with the canteen truck crowd.
fcc
Posted by: fcc | July 18, 2008 7:21 PM
Matt LaClair was also one of the featured speakers at last year's FFRF convention.
If you want to see his speech you can at teh FFRF website:
http://www.ffrf.org/events/2007/video/
Day 2. Unfortunately, there is no way to fast forward to his part, and it's all one long video. =(
I am glad I got to see it it, and meet Matt, in person.
Cheers.
Posted by: Fast:ame | July 18, 2008 7:25 PM
Here we observe the natural behaviour of the wild Authoritarian Follower. Note the extensive use of nonsense, mendacious talking points that were absorbed without analysis or critique from his trusted authorities.
Note the inability to absorb information that contradicts those authorities, and use of arguments that do not follow logically.
Finally, we have this:
The last retreat of the wild authoritarian follower: blind dogmatism. "I'm right, you're wrong. I can't really explain how you're wrong or why I'm right, and it's making me very uncomfortable here, but there's no way I could be wrong."
SteveP, I have a remarkable thing to offer you: a mirror, in .PDF form:
http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf
Posted by: DaveL | July 18, 2008 8:54 PM
"...and the community supports this teacher."
Big deal, even if true. Bad behavior supported by the majority of citizens is still bad behavior.
"The fact that our founders and framers quoted from the Bible 34% of the time on their writings, is proof enough that they founded our country on Christian principles."
Even if true (and, as several people on this thread have shown, it is not), is 34% supposed to be some sort of overwhelming number? If a poll was taken that showed that 34% of the people of Kearney supported LeClair, the SteveP's of the world would probably point to the poll as evidence that the people of that town "overwhelmingly support the teacher in this matter."
Posted by: daniel rotter | July 18, 2008 9:09 PM
""The fact that our founders and framers quoted from the Bible 34% of the time on their writings, is proof enough that they founded our country on Christian principles."
Steve, that is a lie. You've been lied to by people you trust, and they have betrayed your trust.
Please, read some REAL history. Read the primary sources, the letters and essays. What you're being fed is not just false; it's unAmerican.
Thomas Jefferson, from his Autobiography, 1821:
"[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom... was finally passed,... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination."
Posted by: Leigh | July 19, 2008 2:39 AM
And this myth is used to attack our Christian traditions. Remember, James Madison said "Religion is the basis of all government."
Even if the Madison quote (where he uses the generic word "religion") was actually spoken by him, how does it fit in with the preceding argument that the idea of the separation of church and state "is used to attack our Christian traditions?" Does SteveP believe that there is literally no other religion in existence other than Christianity?
Posted by: daniel rotter | July 19, 2008 3:50 AM
SteveP. - I continue to struggle with understanding whether Christianists are delusional or just virulently ignorant given the preponderance of their gullibility for propaganda that supports preconceived religious fantasies. Could you please let us know your educational background and religious denomination?
It would better help me understand this symptom affecting so many social conservatives; so many in fact there is a successful cottage industry doing quite well at propagating lies about America's constitutional ideals similar to the ones you posted here.
Posted by: Michael Heath | July 19, 2008 9:40 PM
Good students, armed with a advanced cellphone that can record the sound & image of a hate filled religious spewing anti-science "teachers" can bring such criminal theocrats to justice. The problem is that local & national news "media" will not describe the criminals conduct in such explicit language. Instead, they re-define the issue into mere religious disputes or a case of alleged "unconstitutionality." The Constitution is the highest law of the land. Those who violate it like boy Bush illegally in the White House or a teacher subverting biology curricula for lies from his fundigelical "church" called "Genesis", both extremes belong in jail.
Posted by: Larry Carter Center | July 20, 2008 5:07 PM
More quote mining -
Posted by: Hal in Howell MI (not far from Hell, MI) | July 21, 2008 7:48 AM