Death Threats for ‘Stomp on Jesus’ Professor 68

The Florida professor who offended millions by allegedly making students “stomp” on a piece of paper with the word Jesus on it has broken his silence.

No doubt he’s got plenty of time for interviews now that, after a deluge of death threats, his university has decided to place him on leave.

The mid-March kerfuffle at Florida Atlantic University happened when the instructor, Dr. Deandre Poole, who taught an intercultural communications class, asked his students to write the word Jesus on a sheet of paper and then step on it. One Mormon student refused and was suspended by the university. Soon, outside protests came pouring in, including a scathing letter from Florida’s Republican governor Rick Scott. The school then apologized for both the disciplinary action and the professor’s exercise.

So far, we’ve had little but the student’s version of events to go on, but now Poole (photo) has told his side of the story to Inside Higher Ed.


And what do we learn?

• Far from being a Jesus-mocking heathen, Poole is a lifelong church-going Christian and former Sunday-school teacher who describes himself as “very religious.”

• The student exercise, Poole says, involved stepping (not “stomping,” as Fox News and others alleged) on the sheet of paper.

• The exercise was meant to demonstrate that some students would feel inhibited about stepping on something that 15 seconds earlier had been a random, insignificant piece of paper. This would give everyone an opening to discuss symbols and their meaning.

• Poole says it made no difference to him whether the students stepped on the paper or not. Most didn’t, and that was fine, he explains, as their discomfort was intended precisely to jumpstart the discussion.

• The suspension of the angry student was the result of the student’s aggressive behavior after class, claims Poole. The young man allegedly slammed his fist into his palm and told the instructor he wanted to hit him (although the student’s attorney denies this ever happened). Alarmed, Poole notified campus security and filed a report on the student.

In revisiting this Christian tempest in a teapot, we can see that at the very least, things are a little less clear-cut than the Christian-right outrage machine made them seem.

Now let’s look at what America’s very own Taliban had to say when they contacted Poole.

He said he has received hate mail and death threats, some of them coming in forms particularly hurtful to an African American. “One of the threats said that I might find myself hanging from a tree,” he said. [H]e has had some days that he did not feel safe at his home and so stayed elsewhere.

On Friday, Florida Atlantic University announced that the threats against the professor had become so numerous that

Poole has been placed on paid leave because his safety could not be assured on campus.

Yet again, the love of Jesus’ followers shines through bright and clear.

[photo via Inside Higher Ed]

68 thoughts on “Death Threats for ‘Stomp on Jesus’ Professor

  1. Lauren Apr 2,2013 3:43 pm

    I wonder what would have happened if the teacher had the students write Mohammed or Vishnu or Odin on the paper instead and what the students reaction would be. In particular the Mormon. I bet they would not have blinked an eye.

    • Carl Carlson Apr 2,2013 5:08 pm

      I’m pretty sure that was the gist of the exercise.

      • jenna Apr 2,2013 10:00 pm

        no it wasn’t. it was a lesson about symbolism. most students in america worship christ. if it was vishnu or odin, it wouldnt have had the same effect. Mohammed might have with a few students, but Jesus is a broader subject.

        • Eric Apr 2,2013 10:16 pm

          I think you fail to understand the meaning of the word gist, Jenna… Carl is dead on about the intentional use of Jesus. You go on to contradict him and then immediately agree with him…. ?

        • MT Apr 2,2013 10:25 pm

          “Jesus” isn’t actually here. Whether he was real or not, whether he was divine or not, he’s a symbol today, in reality. That’s the point. You just have to recognize the role of cultural influences on your perceptions and be objective enough to see it.

        • KP Apr 2,2013 11:30 pm

          Carl was right and you agreed with him, but are misunderstanding his point. If the teacher would have put the words Mohammed or Vishnu or Odin on the piece of paper the students would have stepped on it without any second thought because those certain gods don’t hold the same symbolic power in our minds as Jesus does. So by putting Jesus on a piece of paper he proves that people are only turned off by this because of the words symbolic meaning even though stepping on the word Jesus is highly insignificant.

          • bas Apr 4,2013 8:05 pm

            Dear KP

            I think you are wrong when it comes to the use of the name Mohammed.
            If he had used the name Mohammed you probably would’ve riots and death threats and perhaps people dying all the way to Timbuktu, by followers of the “peaceful religion” of Islam. We’ve seen that before.

      • Akshay Apr 2,2013 11:18 pm

        Orthodox Hindu thought holds all paper sacred; all written word is considered to be a representation of the goddess of learning, Saraswati. Whether you write Jesus, Mohammed, Vishnu, Satan, Steve Jobs, Buddha or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, it does not matter; I feel very uncomfortable stamping on any piece of paper that has anything written on it.

    • Jared Apr 3,2013 4:23 am

      not true I am a Mormon and we are taught to respect others beliefs. I wouldn’t stomp on anyone’s beliefs.

      • ConcernedCitizen Apr 3,2013 9:56 am

        Tell that to the gay people trying to get married. They believe they have that right (as do I). Pretty sure your ilk stomped on their beliefs.

        • Brian A. Apr 3,2013 2:46 pm

          First, being “gay” is not the same as choosing a religious denomination per se, as many would have us believe. Being “gay” is a lifestyle choice. Therefore, the statutes created for the purpose of protecting people in their choice of religious affiliation should not be extended to those who choose to be “gay.”

          Secondly, anyone making “death threats” toward another person or persons is most certainly NOT a true Christian by belief, works, or thoughts.

          Jesus clarified the meaning behind ALL of God’s laws by summarizing them as follows:

          1. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your strength;


          2. Love your neighbor as you love yourself.

          “Death threats” are clearly not indicated in either of the aforementioned points. So, those making the “death threats” then, by logical and rational extension, are not followers of Jesus, but instead Lucifer/Satan.

          • Concerned Citizen Apr 3,2013 3:33 pm

            So you get to decide who is a Christian? The “no true Scotsman” argument won’t get you very far.

            Also, how is religion not a choice? I mean, total brainwashing indoctrination aside, when a person grows up and is fully capable of seeing the flaws with religion where they have to pick and choose certain parts to adhere and excuse away parts they consider wrong (i.e. living by their own morality), how is that not a choice?

          • MJ Apr 3,2013 5:36 pm

            Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice? man the ignorance in this post is astounding.

          • Brian A. Apr 3,2013 8:46 pm


            I do believe homosexuality is a choice. If you are among those who believe being gay is potentially linked to one’s genetic structure, I would like to ask you the following question…

            If one believes in Darwinian evolution with regard to genetic composition, what would the purpose of a “homosexual gene” be?

            If we accept the premise that evolution “weeds-out” the “weaker characteristics” of a species in favor of those traits maximizing the success of the species, then to what end is “nature” served by the perpetuation of a trait that cannot physically bring about the creation of additional members of the species?

            Just trying to wrap my brain around this aspect of the debate…Please help me understand. Thanks!

          • bas Apr 4,2013 8:19 pm

            Answer to: Darwinian evolution and Homosexuality.

            It could be a natural way of saving the human race of
            having TOO many people on earth.

            Bring back the balance on earth, without war but through love.
            The more Gays the better it is for everybody else on earth.

            We don’t need additional members of our species at this moment, there are too
            many of us.

          • Brian A. Apr 4,2013 10:56 pm

            Hi bas…

            For the sake of civil argument, let’s say your take on the situation is accurate.

            My first question would be, how does “nature” assess the current plight of any species, including the human species? What I mean is, doesn’t the situation you describe imply that “nature” itself is sentient, and therefore capable of changing the genetic structure of any species, humans included, as the result of an analytical process?

            Secondly, let’s assume population equilibrium is achieved via the situation you’ve described. Eventually, if the number of homosexual couples/families continues to increase, wouldn’t there be a point in the future where population would begin an exponential decline, possibly to the point of extinction? If that’s true, then wouldn’t the evolutionary axiom, predicated on the notion that nature selects only those genetic traits leading to the perpetuation of any species, be inherently wrong?

            I want you to know that I’m not trying to trap you in your argument…truthfully! I’m truly trying to understand your point of view…whether or not we agree on anything, I feel, is moot. Understanding where we are both coming from is the most important thing for me.


          • Brian A. Apr 3,2013 8:28 pm

            Concerned Citizen…

            Not at all…I’m not the one who decides who is a Christian and who is not. I believe Jesus decides who was and who was not a true Christian at the judgment (i.e., individual or general). I believe the answer to your initial question is provided by Jesus in the Gospels…additionally, a contemporary proverb is also fitting. “If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck…then chances are it’s a duck!” Rather, in this instance, a Christian. If it doesn’t exhibit all of the behaviors of a “duck” (i.e., a Christian), then it’s not! The matter is as simple as that. And Jesus never said it’s okay to threaten someone if the person is guilty of x, y, or z…in other words, fill in the blank. Jesus teaches us to be endlessly patient, merciful, and loving toward one another. To be anything else is to be in error…or, “human,” one could say.

            Regarding your second issue…I couldn’t agree more. Religion “is” a choice. If I intimated otherwise in my initial post, I apologize for the confusion. I didn’t mean to imply religion wasn’t a choice. What I was trying to say is that the Constitution of the United States protects the individual from religious persecution, while simultaneously establishing a separation of church and state. Whether someone is or is not a homosexual is not a constitutionally protected choice; therefore, homosexuality and religious freedom are not at all equal under the law, nor are they on the same plane of existence.

            Additionally, like you, I too do not like “Cafeteria” anything with regard to faith. I believe God laid out a pretty clear path to salvation. I and many others I know, do “not” believe we are free to pick and choose the parts of one’s faith to adhere to, while excusing away those parts they consider to be wrong (i.e., living by their own morality). This type of false “morality” is not anything new. As I’m sure you already know, this is called moral relativism. I can’t stand moral relativism. This nefarious philosophy drives me nuts inwardly, because I see so many people/souls who are misled by its false promises and premises.

            That said, please let me know if I may clarify anything else further. Have a great night!

          • Concerned Citizen Apr 3,2013 9:30 pm

            So, we allow a fictional character to define things? I wonder what Harry Potter would call our version of Dunning-Kruger.

            Merriam-Webster defines Christianity so we don’t have to guess what you think Jesus thought that was translated numerous times across…you get the picture.

            a : one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ
            b (1) : disciple 2 (2) : a member of one of the Churches of Christ separating from the Disciples of Christ in 1906 (3) : a member of the Christian denomination having part in the union of the United Church of Christ concluded in 1961

            Anyone can call themselves a Christian. Anyone. Until there is world-recognized Christian certification process, anyone can claim it. And five minutes later, kick a homeless person and walk into a church.

            Also, the Constitution does NOT protect your right to not be persecuted for any religious beliefs. It claims “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….” You can ask the Amish and Mennonites if they are exempted from taxes (which they could claim is persecution if they had a persecution complex). They are free to practice their religion, but they are not free from any effects of that practice.

            And since you decide how you want to interpret the bible, you cannot escape moral relativism.

          • Brian A. Apr 4,2013 9:09 pm

            Hi Concerned Citizen…

            I’m not saying you have to believe anything I’m espousing. We all have the gift of free-will. I fully respect your decision to eschew anything or everything I submit here. You seem like a very rational person, and I respect that you disagree with me.

            I believe…you don’t have to believe, but I believe…free-will is one of the greatest gifts given to humanity by God.

            So, when you say I am proposing, “we allow a fictional character to define things?”, my answer would be “No” for any number of reasons.

            What I was proposing when I said, “I believe Jesus decides who was and who was not a true Christian at the judgment (i.e., individual or general),” I’m saying this is what Christians believe.

            As a Christian, it is not my place to judge others with regard to their level of Christianity…I cannot even do that with myself. I may only put forth my best effort to be a Christian…to follow in the footsteps I believe Christ walked…to imitate His actions to the best of my ability…and when I fail, to appeal to His mercy by asking for His forgiveness I am assured I will receive, and then to try to heal the relationship(s) I potentially damaged by asking for forgiveness from those I wronged, and then by changing the way I do things in an effort to ensure I don’t repeat the same fault.

            However, a prudent individual is wise to assess the actions of others. At this point, I believe…not saying you have to, but I do…that a true Christian has a responsibility to God and the people involved to point out the error that could lead person or persons to perdition. This is called a Spiritual Act of Mercy, and it’s done out of love…not out of a sense of one being better than anyone else. We’re human and we are all fallible.

            So anyway, I just wanted to clarify my points so there would hopefully be no misunderstanding. I respect your right to reject any or all of what I’ve submitted…we both share the same great gift of free-will.

            Respectfully…Brian A.

  2. Aita Apr 2,2013 3:47 pm

    > The exercise was meant to demonstrate that some students would feel inhibited about stepping on something that 15 seconds earlier had been a random, insignificant piece of paper. This would give everyone an opening to discuss symbols and their meaning.

    And those people should not be permitted in an intellectual society.

    Fuck these people.

    • RedstoneTorch Apr 2,2013 6:42 pm

      “And those people should not be permitted in an intellectual society.”

      Your barrier for entry into intellectual society is so low as to preclude people who place value on symbols? That seems completely bizarre.

      • BredstoneDorch Apr 2,2013 8:20 pm

        I’m glad I don’t have to know you in real life

      • Jasmin Apr 2,2013 10:09 pm

        Yes. Regardless of what it represents to you, if you place so much significance on a word that you won’t step on a piece of paper on which it’s written, you’re an idiot. Worse, if you’re keen to threaten harm over a symbol, you should not only be barred from intelligent society, but imprisoned.

  3. Jeremy Apr 2,2013 3:51 pm

    This teacher is a genius. I did a report in a World Religions class all about the symbology of the christian church (more specifically the catholic denomination) and the basis of most of these “holy” symbols (the Ichthus, Rho-Chi, and the cross in particular) is so mundane that relating it to a piece of ordinary paper is perfect. This whole story, for me, is a perfect analogy of what religion has done to the world. The minute we look at a scribble of carbon on a piece of pressed tree slushy (pencil lead and paper, btw) and find enough meaning in it to not only refuse to deface it but threaten the person who asked us to do so is when everyone should be very, very scared for the future of our civilization. Because if you’re self worth is so low that you cannot deface an object mundane as pencil on a piece of paper because of the symbols on it, you’re not like to go very far.

    • RedstoneTorch Apr 2,2013 6:39 pm

      ” Because if you’re self worth is so low that you cannot deface an object mundane as pencil on a piece of paper because of the symbols on it, you’re not like to go very far.”

      Your assertion flies in the face of all available historical and contemporary evidence. Because, you know, people who have valued symbols in the way you describe actually have gone and are going very far. You might want to consider the way things actually are before armchair reasoning your way to ludicrous conclusions.

      • Gelton Apr 2,2013 7:49 pm

        Like Hitler.

      • Jasmin Apr 2,2013 10:20 pm

        Yay, I get to reply to you again. What you have utilized here is a logical fallacy known as appeal to authority. You imply that because people who place value in symbols have lived arguably successful lives (have gone far), it’s either okay or good to place value in symbols. Wrong. Lots of people who have placed value in symbols have done horrible things. Like the Crusaders and, as Gelton said, Hitler.

      • Braden Apr 3,2013 9:53 am

        I would like to point out that for the sake of this argument, your attempt to debase the validity of these comments is in itself ludicrous and asinine. Take, for instance, the swastika. Although we view it as a dangerous and horrible symbols, if you flip it, the navajo indians would respect it as a sign of hope. In Asia, the swastika was originally thought to be a sign of good fortune or luck, and as such was widely used on helmets in warfare and even on a basketball team’s jersey. However, after 1938, it was rarely ever brought up, due to people’s associations with it being decidedly anti-semitic. The same can be said for any religious symbol.

    • Paul Apr 2,2013 9:16 pm

      Symbology? I’m sure the word you were looking for was “symbolism.” What is the ssss-himbolism there?


    • Gareth Apr 6,2013 1:28 am

      Excellent point, Jeremy.

      Of course symbolism is extremely important – which is why, in the correct context (oh, I don’t know, say a university classroom) this is an excellent starting point for discussion by intelligent people. However, when people mistake the symbol for the thing itself, then there are problems. A physical Bible/Qu’ran is just that, a physical object; a flag is just a piece of cloth.

  4. JP Apr 2,2013 3:55 pm

    I would like to thank this professor for providing an activity that GENERATES DISCUSSION rather then implement his personal point of view. The child who acted aggressively obviously didn’t take the time to see where this process was going. We need more professors like this man, he was exercising REAL WORLD DILEMMAS.

  5. mystrdat Apr 2,2013 4:03 pm

    His exercise certainly delivered on the results.

  6. Marla Apr 2,2013 4:43 pm

    Good for this teacher standing his ground! After reading his intentions and thought process behind the activity, it’s clear that this is a valid and educational lesson. A very smart lesson indeed as before the paper had anything on it, stepping on it was not an issue.

  7. vanderleun Apr 2,2013 5:21 pm

    “The young man allegedly slammed his fist into his palm and told the instructor he wanted to hit him (although the student’s attorney denies this ever happened). Alarmed, Poole notified campus security and filed a report on the student.”

    Sorry, Weak. Not sold.

    • iggzy Apr 2,2013 9:22 pm

      You’re going to say that a teacher taking caution at even a weak threat like that from a person who is a religious fundamentalist insulted be an intellectual exercise is a weak and unbelievable one? I think the outcry and actual death threats are a clear sign that that is the type of caution one should show in regards to people that are making threats in regards to anything related to their religion. Not saying the kid should’ve been suspended, but leaving the situation at least, if not the security was a good decision though it could’ve involved a meeting with a school councelor on the matter in place of suspension.

  8. Sarah Apr 2,2013 5:40 pm

    Vanderleun, the professor did not suspend the student. He submitted a report, and probably did this to cover his own ass if the kid decided to jump him for some reason. The school would then have to investigate the matter, where I’m sure this ‘good Mormon’ became aggressive, again. In the end it’s the student’s fault for making an ass out of himself like that.

  9. TJ Apr 2,2013 6:04 pm

    Fake online persona management, created to populate social interactions with a bunch of fake and believable personas to “influence internet conversations and spread propaganda.”

  10. Reina Apr 2,2013 6:14 pm

    this man is amazing, the death threats, though un called for, only enhanced what he was trying to get across.

  11. leoj Apr 2,2013 7:34 pm

    This is also a great example of how not paying attention and or jumping to conclusions can be embarrassing and dangerous. If that youngster had listened he. Could have learned a valuable lesson. Just because you step on my lords name or likeness neither disrespects me or my Lord. It is just a sad way to portray yourself. People need to learn to think hard first. Then speak.

  12. adrienne grace Apr 2,2013 7:43 pm

    I too would like to thank Mr. Poole for actually getting the students involved especially since the exercise makes perfect since, if hes demonstrating the effects of symbolism. if you asked the students to put a plain piece of paper down first and step on it they would all most likely do it, however then when a symbol was placed on the paper it made them ACTUALLY COMPOSE A THOUGHT OF THEIR OWN. some of those students may have even realized that the symbol of jesus meant more to them then they originally thought. Technically showing the belief, love, or influence jesus has on the american community and those individuals that may have had their doubts. Not only that but it shows the respect that one should have for certain objects, and maybe stopped one person in the class from (god forbid) desecrating a church or a masque or something that may not be so important to them, but is of so much importance to others. A professors job is to teach facts and get the students to react, learn, grow and hopefully become a better person, which i believe Mr.poole was trying to do with this demonstration. I find it disgraceful that anyone would think to harm him and obviously this ignorant morman student (idk his name) didnt learn the lesson that day. which was obviously at the core, about respect. As well as respect for other people’s faiths.
    Also id like to bring up the fact that we “hate” Muslim extremists, in fact we are currently fighting a war over it. Yet some how if you have a Bible in your hand instead its ok? God created all of us in his likeness, to be individuals and learn and grow correct? oh wait thats right were all silly little apes arent we throwing poop at each other every time we dont like something.
    Oh and by the way this whole racism thing, and as far as i can see segregation. Thats still going on in our country, that comes from all sides, i might add is bullshit! I was an army wife living over seas and let me tell you what. NO ONE CARES WHAT COLOR YOU ARE IN ANY OTHER FIRST WORLD COUNTRY! YOU ARE AMERICAN AND THAT’S THAT! even to the british, you dont speak english you speak american. if you are talking about another person or object you have to use description. “Daddy look at that black cat!” “Is it behind that white man with the brown hat?” now look its the exact same thing “Daddy look at that white cat!” “is it behind that black man with tan hat?” I have black people who have been considered my family since the moment we shared our first laugh. Their ancestral heritage should be celebrated just as any other family or culture would. But they are first and for most American. I find the term African American Offensive as so many of my friends do, especially the Jamaican and Brazilian ones lol. But truthfully this is unacceptable of human behavior to say “youll hang this man from a tree” That really should have stopped with all the white girls they thought were witches thousands of years ago. Im truly sorry that some one would say that to mr. poole as i know it has a much different meaning in his heart and mind. However maybe they will realize again, we are gods likeness and obviously he wasnt hanging people. Casting them down from heaven, yes. But not hanging, he loved all his subjects equally and again since we are in his likeness i dont think it matters what color we are. We are all the EXACT SAME, AMERICANS! We are mutts who all just want to be free, I guess god must have been a pretty cool guy for inspiring mr. poole to wake up one morning and use this exercise to show these kids where their faith truly lays, or even just their level of respect. Our country was founded on freedom of religion and i think its nice to see all these years later the majority of our youth still have respect for that at least, if not for their fellow neighbor.
    Every culture has its own gods, faith, statues, and unique symbolism which i believe this class is about. This lesson absolutely was not discriminating against ANY religion because thats simply what the class is about stopping. Mr. Poole is enlightening the students and in all broadening their acceptance towards all forms of people which in turn helps transforms them into better people.

  13. Peter Hammer Apr 2,2013 9:36 pm

    This is absolutely ridiculous. I realize this is a Godless website, but come on. If this were a stab at any other religion it would be met with way more media outrage, including a probable address from the oh-so-sympathetic Obama. Everyone who knows about this knows it was wrong and no church-going man would ever ask people to step on pieces of paper that read Jesus. I don’t buy his story. Also, if he was so passionate about getting students to express their feelings about the exercise then why did he report the kid when he got angry with him after class? I highly doubt he felt seriously threatened by what allegedly happened after class. Mr. Poole deserves everything that comes at him. It’s great to see politicians and other people stepping in and letting him know that he was wrong because we sure as hell know that the media won’t.

    • Jasmin Apr 2,2013 10:27 pm

      Leave. Just… leave. You’re an idiot and you should just go, now, before the eruption.

    • Jon Apr 3,2013 12:44 am

      Except it’s not a stab at any sort of religion. This is why it’s important to read the article before commenting. The whole exercise was to demonstrate the human tendency to ascribe artificial importance to objects simply because of their perceived relationship to important things. He wasn’t trying to “force” anybody to do anything. This has just all been blown WAY out of proportion.

  14. Daniel G Apr 2,2013 9:56 pm

    “America’s very own Tailban” = Freaking classic!

  15. Izzy Apr 2,2013 10:33 pm

    And that’s why I’m an atheist…

  16. Bill Brasky Apr 2,2013 10:54 pm

    Wait “Taliban,” what?

    • Cambrian Apr 2,2013 11:15 pm

      I’m pretty sure it’s an ironic reference to the Christians who are threatening the professor. The offended people who are saying they will hang him from a tree over this Jesus incident are being called ‘America’s Taliban’.

  17. Jared Lorz Apr 2,2013 11:24 pm

    Jesus is a fictional man from 2000 years ago. Go on with your lives.

  18. darthV8R Apr 2,2013 11:50 pm

    Mormonism: Where issuing physical threats is morally superior to drinking a cup of coffee.

  19. Saad Apr 3,2013 12:08 am

    so, if they wont step on a paper that has jesus written on it, then how do they live with themselves when put dollar bills with in god we trust written on them into the thongs of strippers…

  20. Fus Ro Da Apr 3,2013 2:37 am

    Goddamnit. If this was Robert Langdon none of this would have happened. It would have been totally different. A success story in the least.

  21. mike Apr 3,2013 7:34 am

    The prof exercised a good point but should have gone about it another way.
    Also I dont think jesus would condone violence or the threat of violence in his name.

    Love your enemies and those who prosecute you.

  22. Roedy Green Apr 3,2013 8:54 am

    Isn’t in odd it is much easier to get a Christian to shoot a child than step on a piece of paper.
    I can hardly imagine the Jesus as described in Matthew giving a damn about the paper and blowing off killing a child.

  23. jeff johnson Apr 3,2013 12:16 pm

    Write the name
    “The Prophet Muhammed”
    on a piece of paper and have Poole stomp on it. Then see what happens.

  24. bob Apr 3,2013 2:40 pm

    A lot of hate in the comments here. Enjoying your ignorant, hateful echo chamber?

  25. Pingback: "stomp on Jesus"- the other side of the story

  26. D.Wayne Apr 4,2013 6:18 am

    Shame on every Christian who threatened this man.

    Shame on every preacher who encouraged their church to act aggressive toward this subject.

    These people are starting to look like Christian terrorists. You remember those bone-heads who used to kill or harm abortion doctors..? Yes. Terrorists. Christian terrorists. I said it because they acted like it.

    And everyone wonders why Middle Eastern people say Americans are hypocritical. This is why.

    To be Christian means, to be Christ like. Would Jesus have persecuted this man for a class exercise? Would he have threatened this man? Would he have twisted the story like Fox News did to get ratings? Would Jesus have called in life threats to his University?

    If the Bible is true to the word and accurate then it tells us that Jesus would have not even been angry at all at the Professor. In fact, he probably would have had him over for dinner to talk about the class exercise.

    To be Christ like means not to judge or persecute another but to love and forgive.

    So to all the Christian morons in America who got mad at this professor for no reason apparently, shame on you! You shouldn’t call yourself a Christian. Maybe a hybrid of some kind… a Christian terrorist or perhaps nothing at all. You have no right to judge this Professor or what he did in his class room.


  27. ANTIOCHUS EPIPHANES Apr 5,2013 9:12 pm






  28. Melissa May 30,2013 8:23 pm

    It truly sounds like everything was blown out of proportion here. This was not an attack on Christians and their beliefs, as explained in the article.
    I am honestly disgusted by the reactions of these so called Christians. Isn’t it funny how quick these Christians are to start firing racist remarks, and death threats, with no remorse or second thoughts.
    Nobody should be allowed to threaten another human being with death, or send them insults regarding their race, over a misunderstanding.
    I bet half of the people sending the death threats didn’t even know the full story before threatening Professor Poole, which makes this whole ordeal even worse. All they heard was a misinformed message of what really happened,’Professor makes students stomp on Jesus’, they didn’t even bother to find out the Professors reasoning of this outrageous statement.
    Yet again, ignorant, arrogant and prejudice Christians are putting a bad name on religion. As it has been mentioned, a true Christian would not display and condone such disgusting behaviour that has been shown by these Christians.

Comments are closed.