Posted on 06/19/2006 4:32:55 PM PDT by DBeers
(AgapePress) - The young son of a Massachusetts pro-family activist was physically assaulted by fellow elementary school students on the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in the state.
On May 17, first-grader Jacob Parker was beaten up by a group of eight to ten kids on the playground at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington. Just weeks before the assault, his father and mother had filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the school.
Last year, David Parker was arrested and jailed for refusing to leave the school until officials agreed to grant him the right to opt his son out of classroom discussions on homosexuality. The Massachusetts father believes the assault was incited by parents who are upset with his opposition to homosexuality.
"What we're concerned about," Parker says, "is actually the environment being created in the schools, where children, maybe in the normal course of scuffling, will translate the aggression that they may be hearing from parents and administrators to other children."
The pro-family advocate suspects the physical attack on his son may have occurred because parents and school officials are angry over his stand for traditional marriage in Massachusetts and have allowed these feelings to influence kids who attend Estabrook Elementary. Also, he notes, back issues of the "biased" Lexington Minuteman newspaper were placed on a table in the school library for children to read the local coverage of the lawsuit.
Parker feels the Bay State's schools employ a large double standard when it comes to protecting students from bullying and discrimination. If the assault against his son had been perpetrated on a child of homosexual parents, "lessons teaching tolerance and diversity or homosexual behavior normalization would be forced upon the young children," he contends.
"What we have in Massachusetts," the activist points out, "is large sums of money being earmarked for children being bullied from gay households or gay children." However, such funding really "shouldn't be earmarked and directed on that basis," he insists. "It should be for all the children -- not earmarked to protect just one particular segment of society."
Parker says his case against the Lexington schools is fundamentally about freedom of choice for parents to raise their children in the interest of their well being, health, happiness, and development as productive members of society.
While that society allows its citizens the freedom to cross "the God-given and nature-dictated boundaries" of gender, the Massachusetts parent asserts, to do so is a treacherous path to follow and is not the path of freedom he and his wife choose to offer to their four- and six-year-old children.
"We all want what's best for our children," Parker says, "although differences exist in how parents accomplish this goal." The freedom to define what is best for their own families and how to achieve these goals should extend to all parents, he contends, regardless of color, culture, religion, or sexual orientation, and this "parental sovereignty" should not be undermined by school officials or other external authorities.
My knowledge is very limited here. The AOL spyware program activated and when I clicked on details, I received the information I posted. The item was identified as a Trojan horse virus but that too may be a generic classification since spyware would technically fall within the definition of a Trojan horse.
The only other information I can add is that it is the first time I have ever had my anti-virus or spyware protection software activate on a posting from a government website and I have been on the Web since 1990.
Well, that's very, very odd that no one else gets any warning from that site. And yes, I'm running a full arsonel of spyware detection sw.
No, you really don't, else you would agree that the Parker's story does not make sense. If his son was beaten up by a gang, there is no way he would let his son go play over the gang leader's house, after the beating. That is very evident to 99% of the parents here on FR. You act like an ostrich with it's head in the sand. A trained lawyer, detective, judge, etc. would look at and analyze all of these statements the same way.
You know, at one time I'd have agreed with you. But now I see "our side" doing the exact same thing.
A lot of schools in the northeast are headed in this direction. It's wrong and outrageous and up to the parents to protest and lay down the law. In fact, I thought MA had a state law that they couldn't teach this stuff without informing the parents and getting their consent.
However, this newspaper article makes it clear that Parker refused to leave the school after the meeting was over. He insisted on being arrested and refused bail.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/04/29/arrested_father_had_point_to_make/
That is a lie because it is not what happened. When the meeting ended, he refused to leave, and after several attempts to close the building he stayed. His wife left. Finally the school called the police who tried several times to get him to leave. He said that would would not leave unless he was under arrest. So they obliged him. He also refused bail. Now, if you think that statement by him can anyway be construed to be the truth, we have far different definitions.
It also bears mentioning this was not the first time he was denied.
Actually that's not true either. The school assured Parker that no sexual instruction would take place in those early grades. That was not sufficient for him, as they could not assure him that no discussion of same sex parents would take place in an informal setting, such as questions or on the playground. That he would not accept that is his business. But once he opted for arrest rather than using his many other options, and then lie about it says as much about Parker as I need to know.
No, I won't stay off of any thread here and will join any I please. I know you wish homosexual topics to be your own special thing, but once you post here, you have an obligation to defend those posts. As for my self destruction, perhaps. But there is one difference. I have many other places to go if I am banned here. You have none. No other forum would entertain you the way this one has.
Regardless as to this topic you have yet to post anything confirming your theories -persistence yes, effectiveness no... I suggest, and it is just my opinion, that your attempts to villify Mr. Parker have failed miserably AND as well your attempts to disparage me still fail...
Well, we'll let everyone else know the other side of the story and let them make up their minds. You notice few if any have posted in Parker's favor since the new information came out. That should tell you something. Because most realize that Parker's story is now up against the supervisor, the teachers, the schoolground aids, the police chief, the district attorney and children services. So perhaps that doesn't match the Parker story, but it's something to think about. As for disparaging you, I have no such intention or need as you do quite well at that yourself.
Take care.
Actually, what is evident is that I do not feel the need to put Mr. Parker on trial and judge him on matters I deem irrelevant to the substantive issues -as such, I do not need to pretend I am some objective trained lawyer, detective, or judge on a crusade for truth that ignores what my purpose is on this subject -that of opposing the homosexual agenda being pushed as it is in this case REGARDLESS the diversionary peripheral and irrelevant molehills you try to make into mountains...
The tangent you wish to take is for you alone. Do not expect me to join you...
LOL
I saw a commercial "celebrating marriage," in typical drug-commercial rhetoric, except the images were alternately images of two blue collar men with a young girl, then two older women, then two older men with a boy, then two young men and an older man (grand dad?), etc.
I thought to myself, "it can't be...," but it was --a commercial "celebrating" a year of 'marriage equality." Imagine the number of children who saw this and were influenced by it. God help us!
I don't know about you, but I grew up in a relatively affluent suburb, and I saw kids get beat up practically every day. Often "adults truly watched and did nothing." I never heard of anyone filing a police report, nor did any of these parents pull their kids out of school. It's hard to beat free babysitting.
You're kidding, right? We're not talking about a schoolyard brawl here. Parker described something MUCH more sinister.
Have you seen what he said happened to his son? Frankly, anyone who honestly believed his son was beaten in such a fashion and didn't seek medical care is an irresponsible parent. That's why I knew this story didn't make sense from the beginning and suspected he was using his son as a pawn to further his own agenda.
In my experience public school superintendents are the consummate weasels and masters of double-speak.
I remember those days well. I was involved in a few fights myself. I took a couple of bloody noses, but I don't remember any remarkable bruising. Fights were traumatic, but no one ever dreamed of contacting the police. Bullies and fights were a daily part of school. So we shouldn't dismiss Parker's story just because he didn't file a police report or bring his son to the emergency room. A kick in the nuts won't show.
This is an alleged beating by elementary school kids, not adults. Did you ever get in a fight in elementary school? I don't remember any remarkable brusing after a fight, especially after being punched in the stomach. I got a bloody nose a couple of times, but those healed pretty fast.
3) Why didn't Parker make sure his attorney started the bureaucratic paperwork in motion to ensure that Children's Services investigated?
4) Why didn't Parker make sure his attorney started the bureaucratic paperwork in motion to ensure that the DA investigated?
Because attorneys cost money, and such an act would be fruitless at best? Do you think the typical DSS worker would evaluate this case objectively when there is presumably little physical evidence?
5) Why did Parker leave his son in a school where clearly the adults were so irresponsible they would actually stand around and watch while a mob of kids hit, kicked and punched his child?
That's what my dad did, and he was an otherwise wonderful father.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I ran for school committee once in a liberal Massachusetts town, so I have first hand experience with local newspapers and their methods of operation and regard for facts.
Take what they say and divide by ten, then throw it in the trash can.
What, satanic rituals?
It wasn't unusual for kids to get ganged up on when I went to school. Usually one, two or three kids would gang up on a weaker kid, and a bunch of kids would stand around in a circle and cheer them on.
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.