Posted on 09/20/2005 12:20:00 PM PDT by Lindykim
On April 27th of this year, the heavy hand of Bolshevism clamped down upon David Parker, a Lexington, MA. citizen and father of a six year old son. David was arrested on trumped up charges, handcuffed like a dangerous felon, and led off to jail. His heinous crime? Parker is guilty of being a morally principled man with the courage to request that he and his wife be given advance notification when issues of sexual unnaturalness and perversion (transgenderism, sodomy, and same-sex headed relationships) were going to be discussed in his son's classroom. Said Parker, "certain authorities insist that I agree that my children must be taught that gay relationships and transgender transformation are acceptable and normal. When I firmly, albeit patiently, objected and then finally insisted to be notified when and how my own children were to be exposed to these issues, I was arrested and hauled off to jail." Freedom of conscience has been made a hate-crime in Massachusetts.
Among the communist goals listed on the Congressional Record—Current Communist Goals (pp. A34-A35, Jan. 10, 1963) are these: 17) Get control of the schools…use as transmission belts for socialism, 25) Break down cultural standards of morality, 26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as 'normal, natural, healthy."
These goals are affirmed by the Communist Textbook of Psychopolitics. It is written, "Degradation and conquest are companions. In order to be conquered a nation must be degraded. By attacking the character and morals…by bringing about contamination of youth, a general degraded feeling (will facilitate) command of the population."
Lexington Bolshevik commissars are actualizing invidiously evil stratagems devised to effectuate moral decay and collapse within America. In their capacity as school board officials and as teachers, they are spreading propaganda designed to "destroy the home." By "creating continuous juvenile delinquency, forcing upon the state all manner of practices to divorce the child from it (the family) will in the end create the chaos necessary to Communism. Creating a greed for drugs, sexual misbehavior and uncontrolled freedom (will) bring about our alignment." (Communist Textbook of Psychopolitics)
David Parker, a morally principled man, devoted father, and courageous dissident of their evil devices has been stamped: "Enemy of the State."
In a speech before his supporters, Parker stated, "I stand before you banned from attending my son's first day of school…banned from voting, teacher-parent conferences and school committee meetings. The Lexington school administration demands that I ask permission for these rights. What free U.S. citizen must ask for permission to vote, or to be in the presence of his son? The school administration…is attempting to put themselves in the role as parents."
Facing off against Parker and his supporters was a malevolence-fueled rabble gathered together to spit and spew venom. Among the venomous hissing snakes were commissars Helen Cohen, Chairman of the Lexington School Committee; Tom Griffiths, a School Committee member; and Jeanne Kreiger, member of the Lexington Board of Selectmen. Also in attendance were three Marxist 'liberation theology' preachers: Rabbi Howard Jaffe of Temple Isaiah, Rev. Judy Brain, Pastor of Pilgrim Congregational Church, and Rev. Bill Clark, Senior Pastor of the First Unitarian Parish in Lexington. (Article8.org)
Of the venom-spewing rabble, one witness commented, "You could see the look in their eyes, even the kids. It was eerie. They really can't stand us, as if we're polluting their town just by being here." (Article8.org)
In speaking of commissars, Balint Vazsonyi (America's Thirty Years War) observed that, "commissars of 'social justice' demand conformity in our most private thoughts, our innermost sentiments. Conformity—not only to their failed theories, but to their every whim."
"In the predawn light of April 19 (1775), the beating drums and peeling bells summoned between thirty and fifty militiamen to the town green of Lexington. As they lined up in battle formation the distant sound of marching feet and shouted orders alerted them of the Redcoats approach. The British troops approached…rapidly in platoons…a general officer on horseback at their head. The officer came up to within about two rods of the centre of the company…swung his sword, and said, "Lay down your arms, you damned rebels, or you are all dead men. Fire!" Thus began the "confrontation that would launch a nation." (EyeWitnessToHistory.com)
David Parker has been ordered to 'lay down his arms' and surrender. But he, a valiant modern-day Paul Revere, not only cried out the alarm, but courageously fired the first volley, so to speak, when he bravely vowed:
"Let the call go forth from Lexington, across Massachusetts, and throughout the United States to the world - Parents stand your ground!
Don't return their hate and intolerance when fired upon.
But if they mean to have a war over parental rights, Battling for the hearts and minds of our children,
Then let it begin here!
And with regard to the Lexington School administration banning a father's will and presence from all schools,
I—shall—return!
No powers or principalities on this earth or beyond shall separate the Father from his Son!"
David Parker has sounded the battle cry. Now it's time for all good men to unite and join the fight, for as Edmund Burke cautioned, "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."
Copyright Linda Kimball 2005
About the writer: Linda Kimball is a writer and author of numerous published articles and essays on politics, culture, and worldview.
Lots of -very- sour grapes from you. Let me guess---you're pro-same-sex and you're having a giant snit---right?
You done guessed wrong, Lindy.
Apparently you think that wishing to give your child a Christian upbringing without that being actively undermined by teachers on his payroll is "unreasonable" and "reinforcing his religious biases and agenda". Funny how you define Christianity as a "bias". Funny how you define a Christian upbringing as not being in the "best interests of his child". Are you the diversity commisar for the Lexington school board ? You repeatedly claim to support Parker's goals but oppose how he went about them. Frankly, I don't believe you.
Funny how you define a Christian upbringing as not being in the "best interests of his child"
Don't have a problem at all with a Christian upbringing. If that was Parker's objective, he could easily have achieved that. Starting a confrontation and going to jail simply to make a point is rarely in the best interests of a child.
Are you the diversity commisar for the Lexington school board ?
Yes, how did you know? My task is simply to undermine lunacy, but it seems one of the easier jobs I've ever had....
You repeatedly claim to support Parker's goals but oppose how he went about them. Frankly, I don't believe you.
Well, with all due respect, what you believe or disbelieve is of little value to me. But if you believe that article, you could probably use some reality tonic. And I doubt even you could not understand agreeing with goals but disagreeing with "how" they are to be achieved.
The extreme right and left have much in common. Sometimes I'm amazed at how much they hate each other....
MACVSOG68, by your own words you stand convicted.
You obviously think that Christians who are willing to stand up to injustice in the public sphere at whatever cost are "unreasonable". You think that Christians who are willing to fight for control of the public sphere against militant deviance instead of slinking quietly into some Christian ghetto are "extremists". You secularists do not like Christians who will not accept dhimmi status, i.e. a kind of second class citizenship that keeps its mouth shut in the public sphere.
There is not one damn thing wrong with going to jail to fight injustice. Every movement in American history that ultimately prevailed was started by people who weren't afraid of going to jail. He is fighting for every Christian child in that school whom those teachers will mock and belittle and try to get the other children to ostracize for their faith. Old Testament prophets and Christians have been going to jail for preaching God's word for millenia. If the day comes when opposition to sodomy is declared a "hate crime", Christian ministers going to jail for preaching God's word will become pretty routine. In Europe and Canada it has already started. This is war and we have to be ready to go down the line.
Of......?
You obviously think that Christians who are willing to stand up to injustice in the public sphere at whatever cost are "unreasonable"
No, only when they lie about it, as was done here.
You think that Christians who are willing to fight for control of the public sphere against militant deviance instead of slinking quietly into some Christian ghetto are "extremists"
I don't think you are a stupid person. Even you can't see that coming down the pike. But yes, such thinking when positioned on a social or political bellcurve would be accurately described as extremist.
You secularists do not like Christians who will not accept dhimmi status, i.e. a kind of second class citizenship that keeps its mouth shut in the public sphere.
With all due respect, you know absolutely nothing about me, or my beliefs, except that I don't like anyone lying about an incident, rather than telling the truth about one's real agenda. Nor do I care much for those who will use children as pawns in some stupid game of religious one-upsmanship. Such was done during the Terri Schiavo fiasco when a man sent his two children to get arrested. Great teaching points there.
There is not one damn thing wrong with going to jail to fight injustice.
I agree. Though more leftist radicals than those from the other extreme tend to use this tactic.
He is fighting for every Christian child in that school whom those teachers will mock and belittle and try to get the other children to ostracize for their faith
Now, I have to admit that sounds pretty chilling. I've not seen anything to back that up. Do you have any links or are you simply making it up to add fuel to the fire?
Old Testament prophets and Christians have been going to jail for preaching God's word for millenia.
Well, if you know anything of the inquisitions, a few others have managed to incur the wrath of the ruling elite too.
If the day comes when opposition to sodomy is declared a "hate crime", Christian ministers going to jail for preaching God's word will become pretty routine.
Big "if". Now if that opposition takes on an air of violence or lawbreaking, then you may not have to wait long. Operation Rescue found that out. There is a pretty strong line between legitimate protest and the violation of the rights of others.
This is war and we have to be ready to go down the line.
Been hearing that alot these days. Over at DU, the left is ready to revolt against the established government to support their beliefs. Gonna be hard to tell the players (warriors) without a score card.
I've been observing Mac's responses and other than nit-picking the article to death and condemning David Parker, Mac has been very Noticeably silent as regards the despotic behavior of the school administration. Likewise his silence has been deafening with regards to the issues of sodomy, transgenderism, etc., (Marxist Queer Theory/Stalin's Identity Politics) being indoctrinated into children via Stalinistic 'sensitivity training."
Your silence has been deafening Mac. We must assume, based upon your silence, your continued condemnation of Parker rather than the Bolsheviks (yup---there's that word again!),and your determined nitpicking of both the article & its author that you Support the arrest of Parker and the indoctrination of America's children with Stalnist sensitivity training couched in Marxist Queer Theory.
Furthermore, that you believe that you hold the moral high ground is very apparent. Tell us Mac, how there can Be a moral high ground when by virtue of the secular (perhaps you're a humanist? atheist?) worldview there are NO moral absolutes, no right way, no wrong way, and thus NO truth.
But by your arguments, you are saying that there Are moral absolutes--that there is a right way and a wrong way,and that truth is knowable by these. In addition,you are claiming the moral high ground because You possess this knowledge. Of course Mac, this makes you a Hypocrite---at the very least.
One of the things that manifests itself with the extremes at both ends is their frequent use of epithets, slurs and other sorts of insults to keep off the topic. For anyone on theradical religious right to accuse anyone of stealing the moral high ground fails the most rudimentary of laugh tests.
I've been observing Mac's responses and other than nit-picking the article to death and condemning David Parker, Mac has been very Noticeably silent as regards the despotic behavior of the school administration
Actually I've tried on post after post to get a clear idea of what really happened. To any but the most committed, close-minded ideologues, a few questions cry out for answers. I responded to the original poster (you) simply stating that something appeared not to be as reflected in this obviously one-sided story. I was willing to give Parker the benefit of the doubt, but did want some answers as to exactly why he resorted to a rather extreme solution when others appeared available. Exactly what did the school do? Exactly what did he ask of the school?
Likewise his silence has been deafening with regards to the issues of sodomy, transgenderism, etc., (Marxist Queer Theory/Stalin's Identity Politics) being indoctrinated into children via Stalinistic 'sensitivity training."
Perhaps you have some documentation to support this? And do you have documentation reflecting school board policies regarding parental concerns and rights? Or are you simply following nose to tail the rest of the anti-everything group?
and your determined nitpicking of both the article & its author that you Support the arrest of Parker and the indoctrination of America's children with Stalnist sensitivity training couched in Marxist Queer Theory.
If you read my posts you will admit that I never questioned his motives, only his methods. And I questioned an article that obviously was duplicitous and designed more to incite rather than inform. I only support his arrest if he violated the law. And it appears to me, confirmed by others on this thread, that the arrest was his goal in any case.
Furthermore, that you believe that you hold the moral high ground is very apparent.
Well, as I've said, for you to charge anyone with stealing the moral high ground is ludicrous. To say that I likely support what Parker wants, but question his methods is hardly tantamount to stealing the moral high ground.
Tell us Mac, how there can Be a moral high ground when by virtue of the secular (perhaps you're a humanist? atheist?) worldview there are NO moral absolutes, no right way, no wrong way, and thus NO truth.
I really can't help you there, because in spite of your God given talent for looking into people's minds and souls, you still know nothing about me. And you are correct. I don't hold the moral high ground, but by permitting lies and distortions to substitute for truth and accuracy, neither, I suspect, do you.
But by your arguments, you are saying that there Are moral absolutes--that there is a right way and a wrong way,and that truth is knowable by these
Perhaps truth is a moral absolute, and if so, there certainly are no moral absolutes with respect to your article. The truth I seek is far simpler than you accuse me of. I simply want to know what really happened and what really motivated Parker to force the confrontation leading to his arrest.
In addition,you are claiming the moral high ground because You possess this knowledge.
You may need to take your meds. I don't possess enough knowledge to start a revolution as some here want. Perhaps you could help with my education by answering a few of my questions, then I could be as knowledgeable as you.
I wonder...if you believe that article was balanced and informative, what do you think of the MSM?
Lindykim, you have hit it right on the head about this Macvsog68 character.
He comes here with his "I don't know what really happenned" routine and then drops typical DU secularist left attitudes about Christian conservatives ("radical religious right", "extremists"). And as you observed, not one word about the use of the classroom to advance the sodomite agenda. Obviously to him it is Christians who are the enemy, not the sodomite agenda. He just doesn't have the guts to come out and show what his real agenda is.
Sam:
"He is fighting for every Christian child in that school whom those teachers will mock and belittle and try to get the other children to ostracize for their faith"
MAC:
"Now, I have to admit that sounds pretty chilling. I've not seen anything to back that up. Do you have any links or are you simply making it up to add fuel to the fire?"
Me:
Just checked up on this thread, and there's a lot to comment on (probably won't do it tho').
There have been many articles on FR in the last three years since I've been here about kids bringing a Bible story to class when asked to bring a favorite book, kids trying to pray or say Grace before a meal in school, bringing a Bible to read during individual reading time, bringing candy canes to hand to kids with a simple Christmas message, and more - and being sent to the principle's office, Bibles confiscated, humiliated, scorned and punished in front of the other children. These are just off the top of my memory.
In CA where homosexual indoctrination is mandatory K-12, I've read accounts of kids humiliated and taunted if they raised their hands after being asked if any kids though homosexual behavior was wrong. I've read letters to the editor from kids about this. I've read letters to the editor from kids in high school complaining about forced assemblies at which transvestites and transsexuals glorified their miserable lives.
And on and on and on. Oh, and kids getting kicked out or sent home for tee shirts with a Bible verse, or a statement supporting marriage. But a boy coming to school dripping with makeup and red fingernails? Or even a dress? Fine and dandy.
It's already happening. These are just a few instances that I've run across.
Please note comment 20 on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1489019/posts
Trial Postponed for Mass. Dad Fighting Homosexual Curriculum at Son's School
I posted some links that give all the background information and details that anyone could want. I'm no good at html (yet) so I don't want to do the work to click'em and copy the urls again. But just click the link and click again on comment 20 and all your questions will be answered.
Is it Mr. Parker's methodology you have doubts about, or the fact that he is opposed to his little son learning about the joys of the "gay life"? Do you consider those who want homosexual indoctrination out of public schools extremists?
Your response is typical the 'deconstructionist' mentality of Leftists: paragraph upon paragraph of quibbling, obfuscation & snide put-downs wrapped in misplaced morality,all of which is revelatory of three things:
A) you have no principled stands of your own
B) your "weaponry" (snide attacks) is the product of someone else who devises this pap & then publishes it for people like you to read & spew
C) the only absolute in your life is that you have absolutely no source for your morality
All of which points to the fact that you remain a hypocrite.
Sam, I repeatedly tried to discuss this issue with you in spite of your repeated attempt to ignore my questions. You are the people pushing Parker's agenda. Why can't you simply respond to the questions?
Little, about all you can do is tell me stories of the treatment of children of faith across the country. They are simply not relevant to the questions I posed on this thread. I read your link, and again it failed to respond to my questions.
If Mr. Parker wants to go anywhere with this, he better look for folks to help that can also think and communicate.
You three might stop condemning and insulting long enough to read the entire story, as I requested earlier. I did. I read the entire set of emails, somthing none of you apparently did. I read several stories from more balanced sources, something none of you did. And I now know apparently what really happened. You don't. If you all are the best Parker has, his little crusade is doomed from the start. Have a good day.
Wouldn't you be more comfortable in the sodomite toilet that is DU rather than on a conservative board among "radical Christian right" types ?
You come with this phony "open minded" routine just wanting answers to your "questions" when really your agenda is to stop those Christian "extremists". Like the way Holocaust deniers work who just want to ask a few "open minded questions" about whether any Jews were actually killed.
The reason I posted (from my memory) some instances of children being discriminated against for either their religion or stand on homosexuality was because you doubted that such had occurred; so I was merely responding to your statement. Now you say it has no relevance to the discussion?
You use the words "little crusade" in connection with Mr. Parker's attempt to have his child opted out of pro-homsexual instruction.
What is your personal viewpoint about pro-homosexual instruction in grade school?
As far as I am concerned, any doubts you have about this situation are easily taken care of by reading all the links provided, and I am not sure I understand what your viewpoint is. Do you think that such homosexual instruction in public schools is neutral, a good thing, should not be happening, or what? I sincerely would like to know, since that position makes all the difference.
Personally, I consider that all teaching about sexuality other than purely biological function is the parents' responsibility. And any teaching that is pro-homosexuality or pro-promiscuity or so-called "moral relativity" is extremely destructive and morally wrong.
Looks like Mac has taken his DU "cue cards" and gone home.
I guess he was just another pro-sodomite lurker who spent a whole lot more time fighting Christian "extremists" than he did the sodomite agenda.
Actually Sam, I was a member of this board years before you, and will likely still be here when you're gone. I remain on this board because by and large, it's made up of intelligent reasonable conservatives. While we don't always agree, most are willing to discuss issues and explore other perspectives, even if ultimately they disagree. As for you, the only thing good about a closed mind is that it does keep the flies out.
You come with this phony "open minded" routine just wanting answers to your "questions" when really your agenda is to stop those Christian "extremists". Like the way Holocaust deniers work who just want to ask a few "open minded questions" about whether any Jews were actually killed.
I'll give you one thing. You are good at changing the subject when you are unable to respond. It's a favorite tactic at DU, as you appear to know. My agenda is completely unknown to you, and again, by trying to insult me into submission, you are able to sidestep the issue and the questions I posed. Good job.
One of the things extremists never understand is the common courtesy of pinging anyone referred to directly on a post. Failure to do so generally reflects a bit of cowardice.
Macvsog68, your agenda is obvious. Christian conservatives are your enemy (you keep slipping. "radical Christian right". "extremists". What's next ? Talibornigans ? Fristians ?). Like all secularists you can't help showing that to you religion is a bad thing, the poison of "small minds". Your total absence of any criticism of sodomite indoctrination in elementary school, your complete lack of any sense that this is something utterly, despicably wrong, shows the toilet (or Log Cabin ?) you are really coming from.
Let us assume for arguments sake that you are some libertarian cultural liberal type (basically, a DU-er who doesn't like to pay taxes). I am always amazed by the idiocy of libertarians who can't understand that you can only have a 1900 state in a 1900 culture and society. An individualist society of two child families needs the state to look after its sick and elderly because it can't do the job itself. A traditional, religious society of 5+ child families can look after its sick and elderly. As culture became more secular, families got smaller, so the state got bigger. You can only end middle class welfare in a traditional religious culture of large families that can provide those nursing services.
Everything the GOP has it owes to Christian conservatives, not ex-hippie libertarians with harebrained ideas on every subject. We are the single strongest political force in America while the libertarian are a bunch of pot smoking eccentrics.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.