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.
In order for Parker to file a lawsuit, he has to show damages. People typically would do that, in this situation, by filing a police report and a hospital report.
Parker didn't take his child to the hospital, did he? I've never read anything that indicates his child was examined medically.
Also, it took Parker what, 3 or 4 weeks to file a police report? Why did he wait so long?
The update from the school district says that Child Services and the DA have declined to investigate because Parker didn't file a complaint.
I'm sorry, but those don't sound like the actions of a parent truly convinced their child was beaten by a mob of kids with adults watching.
Thank you so much for posting that.
I'd read the father was arrested because he wouldn't leave the premises. Not because he objected to the pro homosexual material being taught to his son.
In fact, I think I read that the school not only heard Parker's complaint but assured him and other parents who also objected that if they signed a letter stating their objections, their children would be exempt from being taught the kind of pro homosexual tolerance that Massachusetts is pushing. (I could be wrong, but I think I remember reading that).
Are you being sarcastic or what?
I can't tell you the amount of times I've seen schools cover and obfuscate the real story in a mass of words that sound good on the surface.
I don't think it's cover that Children's Service has declined to investigate because the father didn't sign a complaint.
I don't think it's cover that the DA has declined to investigate because the father didn't sign a complaint.
Let me ask you something.
If you child came home injured and said that a mob of kids attacked him and adults watched, wouldn't you immediately go to the hospital to check for internal wounds that would be likely from a mob, go to the police to file a complaint, and from there ask for advice from an attorney who would help file the correct bureaucratic paperwork to get the DA and Children's Services involved?
It's what I'd do so fast I'd be operating the phones from both ears. LOL
If this 'gangland hit' story was true, THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL THAT THE PARKER'S WOULD LET THEIR SON GO OVER TO THE 'CHIEF ASSASSIN’S HOUSE TO PLAY AFTER THE FACT!!! THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE 'ASSASSIN’S' PARENTS (who supposedly put the kid up to it) WOULD LET THE PARKER'S SON OVER THEIR HOUSE.
Enough of this BOGUS story already.
A more complete description of what happened at the school can be found on this web site: http://lps.lexingtonma.org/ AS FOLLOWS:
UPDATE: JUNE 19, 2006 Recently, the media reported on a playground fight at Estabrook School in Lexington, Massachusetts, where one first grade student hit another first grade student. After the media focus on this incident, the Estabrook School principal issued a letter to parents reporting the details of this incident and the school's response, and the Superintendent of the Lexington Public Schools issued a similar report to the community and the press. Because of an allegation that the incident was "fueled and incited by adults (and yes, school officials)," the Superintendent, after having conducted his own investigation, referred the incident to the Lexington Police Department, the Middlesex District Attorney and the Department of Social Service(DSS).
The Lexington Police Department has issued the following statement, "The school department is handling this situation involving two first graders professionally and does not require action from the police." The Child Abuse Prevention office of the District Attorney and the DSS have each declined to initiate investigations, in part because the parents of the first grader who was hit have not filed a complaint, and in part because they found no basis for an investigation in the facts and circumstances reported. The School Committee and the Superintendent have both concluded that the allegation of adult involvement in and/or incitement of this minor playground incident is entirely without merit.
PRESS RELEASE: June 16, 2006 Some of you may be aware that the press has received a news release related to a playground incident at Estabrook. The Estabrook principal has investigated the issue over the past two days, talking to the adults and children involved. The following are the facts as she understands them.
On May 17, several first graders were involved in a disagreement over who would sit where in the cafeteria. As a result, upon going outside one child took another by the hand and brought him to a third student in an area of the playground that is somewhat difficult for the adults to see. (The student who was hit said that he went willingly.) All children who saw agreed that the third student then hit the student who had been brought to him two to four times in the chest/abdomen (children’s accounts vary) and he fell to his knees. The student who was hit says he was hit when down; the other children say he wasn’t. One child reports that one student held the arm of the student who was hit; however, the child who was hit and the other children did not report this. The children involved named five children who were nearby watching but not directly involved. Several other students were close enough to see a cluster of students but not close enough to see what was happening. The student who did the hitting suggested that others also hit, but none of them did so. Based on the children’s accounts, this all may have happened in under a minute. The aide on duty saw a group of children gathering, and as she walked toward them was approached by a child that said someone was being bullied. When the aide inquired what was going on, the child who was hit identified one student who hit him, and the other children agreed. The child who was hit said he was not hurt and did not want to go to the nurse. He reported that his feelings were hurt, because the child who hit him was his friend.
The child who did the hitting was sent to the assistant principal’s office and while talking with her acknowledged his behavior. As a result, he filled out a “think sheet,” to reflect on his behavior and choices, missed recess on two days, and wrote an apology. In addition, the classroom teacher called both sets of parents and a class discussion was held about not hitting and speaking up when there is a problem on the playground. The teacher indicated that both parents took the matter seriously and seemed satisfied with the outcome. Following the incident the boys were observed arm in arm at school and subsequently the child who was hit went to the house of the child who hit him for a play date.
On May 31, the parents of the child hit casually inquired of the assistant principal as to the consequence given to the other child, and they were told that the child’s parents were informed and a consequence given. Other than this brief interaction, between the time of the phone call by the teacher to the parents on May 17 until June 14, there were no complaints of injury or dissatisfaction with the process to the teacher, nurse, or the administrators. On June 14, school administration received a call from a local paper stating that they had received a press release that a child had been assaulted at Estabrook.
In this case, we followed all of our usual procedures and worked with both sets of parents to resolve this issue. We are surprised that it has resurfaced in a press release issued by a group calling itself Mass Resistance without any prior contact with the school. The press release states that the incident was "fueled and incited by adults (and yes, school officials).” We have found nothing in our investigation that would support this allegation in any way. Nonetheless, in the interest of an open and thorough review of the incident, the matter has been referred by the superintendent to the Lexington police, District Attorney’s office, and the Department of Social Services for independent investigation.
At Estabrook, playground safety and student behavior are school improvement goals each year. The school, like all of the schools in Lexington, works hard to establish behavioral expectations, teach students social skills, and provide strong supervision on the playground. In the seven years that Joni Jay has been principal, we have more than doubled the adults watching students on the playground and our coverage ratio at Estabrook is at or above all other Lexington elementary schools. We have separated older and younger students and have fewer students on the playground at one time. We have trained and hired skillful aides who stay actively involved with children, equipped with walkie-talkies and actively walking around identifying potential problems and working through them with students. The Open Circle program, adopted this year, has provided students with skills to help them resolve problems verbally. Administrators discuss with children the reasons for what happened, the consequences, and future alternatives every time there is a problem. We involve parents and teachers when a child has broken school rules, and if the nurse treats a child due to a playground incident. Each incident is documented, and referrals are made to the counselor and other support personnel when appropriate. As a result of the efforts of staff and parents working together, physical altercations on the playground have been reduced significantly.
A major goal of the Lexington Public School system is both to help all children feel safe as well as to help the child who has erred learn. We are continuously looking to improve the playground experience for children and welcome your input.
This is incorrect. The school ended the meeting between Parker and the school administrators since he would not accept the idea that teachers could not control all of the questions that could possibly be asked in class or on the playground. They had assured him that no sexual type instruction was on any curricula during the early years of education. The school building was being locked up and Parker refused to leave.
Finally they called the police who also asked him several times to leave. He said no, the only thing that would force him to leave was arrest. So they obliged him, and after he made a number of phone calls they took him to jail where he refused bail.
The rest is history. Parker's supporters put out the phony story about the school having him arrested for objecting to the homosexual materials being taught his son. Just as in this latest story of the gang dragging his son away and beating him would not pass the laugh test, neither did the first one he put out. It's always best to check out all the stories to try and put together the facts of what really happened...assuming one wants to know what really happened.
To believe Parker, one has to believe the school board, teachers, aids, police department, District Attorney's office, DSS and others are all in a gigantic conspiracy to cover everything up. Again....try the laugh test.
I suppose so, but I don't believe the school protectorate further than I can throw him. I've had too many and seen too many bad lies from them.
What I thought was exceedingly strange was that the dad didn't pull him out of the school immediately. He gets arrested to take a stand against his son being taught that homosexuality is normal, but he doesn't take a stand against his son being beat up by a gang?? Weird.
But then I keep in mind the pics I've seen of the town people demonstrating, with placards AND THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN for homosexual rights and pro-homosexuality.
I think it's a bogus story too. What had worried me initially is that a child was hurt severely and wasn't taken to the hospital.
But then I realized he wasn't treated at a hospital which told me nearly everything. If my child had been beaten by a gang, there could be internal injuries that a parent can't see. That Parker didn't immediate seek medical help was very suspicious since he didn't sound like a negligent parent.
Then the more I read, the more I became concerned for the child again because I think he's being used as a pawn by his father to further his own agenda. I'm not saying the father's agenda isn't worthy, but one does not use ones child to further any agenda.
Why didn't the father just take his boy out of that school and either homeschool or put him into a Christian school?
The father deserted his own duty to his son by taking a controversial stand without thinking of the consequences his boy might suffer.
It's amazing how urban legends start, isn't it?
Free Republic used to have a reputation for excellent research. You and a few other freepers have tried on these threads to provide that research and have been treated so horribly that I'm stunned there weren't mass suspensions handed out.
But it's becoming more and more clear that Free Republic is being taken over by extremists and paid opinion shapers. I have read about this in a book for which Jim Robinson wrote the foreward and was also given some interesting information by another freeper on how this works.
I think we're seeing the effects of those opinion shapers above because there is no way that good freepers could or would ignore the truth.
Thank You! When the police show up on this type of call, THEY ALWAYS give you a warning to leave the premises. They really don't want to have to go through all the BS of an arrest, paperwork, court time, etc., etc., over something that is basically very petty. They just don't show up and say "Hey you, you're under the arrest". I don't like those who LIE, MISLEAD, DISTORT on any side.
See #28 for a more complete explanation of what really happened with regard to Parker's arrest.
I'm probably the last person to stick up for a public school, especially in Massachusetts. We used to live in CT and my stepkids live in MA and have kids in school in that state.
The agenda of educators is obvious and horrible and I don't like it a bit. But we have got to stick with the facts if we want to be taken seriously on Free Republic.
I don't know if you know this, but after Clinton's impeachment trial, House Impeachment Managers gave a party for freepers that was shown on C-Span.
Three years ago, at the start of the Iraq war, all the networks broke into regular programming to show a picture of a soldier who had been kidnapped by AQ. Freepers did a bit of research and found the picture the nets and AQ were using was actually a picture of a GI Joe Doll. LOL. I kid you not. I think I still have that thread saved under my bookmarks.
Then of course, a 30 year CBS anchor tried to take down a sitting president using fake memos. Freepers uncovered Rather's fraud being perpetrated on the American public and we got a lot of attention in books and dozens and dozens of mainstream media news articles.
All that attention attracted fringe groups on the left and right and, imagine a telephone bank. Now imagine a computer bank. That's how these groups operate. They are paid opinion shapers and come here and create multiple identies on multiple computer and cause dissent among conservatives and try to make it look like conservatives are nutjobs, etc.
That is what will happen in this case if people go off half cocked without the facts and post things that aren't true. So I think we should investigate things before we buy into the spin posted by EITHER side on any site.
Let's not let this forum be corrupted.
LOL -get a grip...
Why don't you quit attacking freepers who don't agree with you? It's clear there are holes in this story.
I thought it was leftists who didn't let the facts get in the way of their agenda, but I can see it's people with a narrow view of the world who operate the exact same way.
Nope. I don't info the admin moderator when I'm being sarcastic.
I didn't notice that ping to the mod; how did you know that there was virus stealing info on the thread? What would a person look for?
infostealer is a generic name. What was the specific spyware name?
Previous threads:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=davidparker
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.