Guest Commentary: Refuting accusations against David Parker

Lexington Minuteman ^ | July 28, 2005 | Neil Tassel

[lexfreedom]

Guest Commentary: Refuting accusations against David Parker By Neil S. Tassel/ Guest Commentary Thursday, July 28, 2005

As counsel for David Parker, I wish to clarify numerous inaccuracies which have plagued your paper in recent weeks concerning my client through many letters to the editor. While my nature is to believe that most of these inaccuracies are simply erroneous assumptions, I believe that many are intentional misrepresentations intended to further the political agendas of their proponents.

First of all, Mr. Parker does not hate homosexuals or their families. In fact he is an exceptionally kind hearted man, who is anguished that his arrest has caused any pain to this community. He is especially troubled that some misguided parents are telling their children that he hates them, or their families. The complexity of Mr. Parker's situation is beyond the capacity of small children, and as a consequence some seem to be reducing it to a simple, yet erroneous, hurtful message. Mr. Parker and his family are happy to belong to a diverse community and to have his children attend school with children raised by all types of families.

The asserted position that he wants to separate his children from those raised by gay-headed households is not true. However, the Parkers find it alarming that the definition of diversity does apparently not include people with views such as theirs. Moreover, although this town claims to be "no place for hate" there seems to be no shortage of hate for people who do not agree with the norms endorsed by segments of the populace. Many might be interested to learn that Mr. Parker's view of homosexuality resulted in-part from the illness contacted by his best friend who was gay. When Parker observed signs of his friend's illness, he urged him to obtain medical care and personally underwent a preventative series of gamma-globulin shots, so that he too, would not be overcome by hepatitis. The illness of his friend had a profound effect on Mr. Parker's beliefs.

Second, Mr. Parker is not against a book. This commonly heard misconception is both rampant and untrue. The book sent home with their son simply spurred the Parkers into action. To label the Parkers as "book haters" is to try to portray them as book burning extremists which is being done for apparent political gain. The fact is that Mr. Parker, an intelligent individual with a Ph.D., takes exception to specific belief. That belief is that a gay couple with children is a normal and morally equivalent family structure which is equally beneficial to the ultimate goal of any family, the wellbeing of the children being reared. These are matters of great importance and the subject of great debate, well beyond the scope of this letter. To reduce this significant matter into a simple fear of a kindergarten book is to trivialize, perhaps intentionally, the paramount importance of Mr. Parker's concerns.

Third, it is common for his opponents to try to obfuscate Mr. Parker's narrow request to the schools. People argue that if allowed, Mr. Parker's request would mean such odious things as children being prevented from drawing pictures of their family, discussing their weekends, or having discussion among themselves about their families. All are untrue. The Parkers' proposal was simple: notify them in advance if there is a planned discussion about same-sex issues, and, if an adult becomes involved in a discussion spontaneously begun by a child, then remove their child from the discussion. Their concern is that impressionable children will hear for the first time from a respected adult that a homosexual headed family is a normal family structure, and an equally "good" one at that. Regardless of whether one agrees with that premise, it is a matter of one's values and beliefs. It is not borne in hate, but in a concern for his children and a desire to see them equipped to make decisions in a healthy manner.

Lastly, I have also become aware of one particularly paranoid and offensive notion: that Mr. Parker is a shill who brought his family to Lexington to stage this controversy. Without revealing more than necessary about this man's private life, he was transferred from another state as a result of a corporate relocation. I also note, as a result of this move, he left a large home on a private lot and moved to a more modest home on a busy street. Ironically, he came to Lexington filled with optimism for his children to be educated in the noted school system and was willing to sacrifice for that goal.Instead he has had sleepless nights filled with anxiety about his arrest and potential incarceration.

In sum, I suggest Mr. Parker is a man of great principles. Clearly not everyone agrees with his principles, but he does not desire to impose them on anyone. He only wishes to raise his children in a manner that he feels appropriate and healthy. So important was this goal to him that he was willing to face the full power of the commonwealth, the power to take his liberty. How many of his antagonists can say that they were willing to do even a fraction for the sake of their children?

Neil S. Tassel is a Lexington resident.

[lexfreedom]

It took the Lexington Minuteman 7 WEEKS to agree to publish this letter by David Parker's attorney, while those attacking David Parker with lies and accusations had free rein to pile on him in the paper.

[Schnucki]

However, the Parkers find it alarming that the definition of diversity does apparently not include people with views such as theirs. Moreover, although this town claims to be "no place for hate" there seems to be no shortage of hate for people who do not agree with the norms endorsed by segments of the populace.

Yep.