Official says father's view on gays didn't spark fight (David Parker insulted by Superintendent)

Boston Globe ^ | June 20, 2006 | Maria Sacchetti

[CindyDawg]

I admire Mr. Parker's stand on the doctrination. I don't support him on keeping his kid there though.

[CindyDawg]

There seems to be an attitude that private school is for the rich and parents aren't smart enough to homeschool. Both are false. You might have to put off the new car or live in less housing or get another job with a flexible schedule or quit to homeschool but until parents start to look at it as an investment and not an expense, it may impossible. At least that was how I saw it.

[MACVSOG68]

That's a pathetic attitude.

This is not about me. Keep your inane insults to yourself, and I will be happy to discuss this rationally.

You seem more concerned with Robert's Rules of Order than the fact that the school was corrupting the morals of a minor.

Mr. Parker had every right to express his concerns over the book. He did so, and when he could not get the satisfaction he wanted, he should then have gone to the school board, and then file his lawsuit. That is the way most civilized parents handle such issues.

Parker though thought that getting himself arrested was more important than following through on his goal of getting an agreement not to present such materials to his child.

Parker knew what he was going to do, and given his demand that no discussion take place on same sex anything, of course the school could not agree to that, even though they assured him that no sexual formal discussions were on the agenda for the early grades. Parker knew all that.

When he got himself arrested, he left his child in the school to be the center of ridicule and scorn. Parker didn't give a damn about his son, but only his crusade. As one Freeper who like you believes Parker can do no wrong said, "There are casualties in every war".

Let's not forget that the perpetrator of the crime was the teacher/school/super/school committe, not the parent. Parker's reaction was remarkably restrained.

First, there was no crime committed except by Parker which led to his requested arrest, and second, as I said, if Parker really wanted to get the books out of the school, he knew he had several legitimate options that did not involve putting his son in the center of things on his own.

[MACVSOG68]

When I was in school the bullies usually denied bullying anyone. Maybe they had honest bullies where you grew up.

Right. In the first grade, the bullies are all going to stick together. Perhaps the little girl who went to the play ground aid is part of the cover up? And of course all the other kids who saw these monsters all drag poor Jacob around the school and begin beating and kicking him all over his body were also part of the cover-up? Funny that Parker waited a month to bring this out isn't it? Is there anything you would question Parker about, or does he simply walk on water because he pushes an agenda you support?

[MACVSOG68]

You should get a job with the Boston Globe...

LOL! I think he already does.

You folks are all alike. You can't tear down the argument, so you try to tear down the poster.

[Aquinasfan]

You folks are all alike. You can't tear down the argument, so you try to tear down the poster.

I think that was my first non-substantive one. It was worth it because it was funny.

[DBeers]

You folks are all alike. You can't tear down the argument, so you try to tear down the poster.

You have no legitimate arguments -zilch, zero, nada...

All you do on the David Parker threads is the very thing you whine about in this posting

You need to come to grips with reality -- There is NOTHING that can support the illegitimate fallacy of homosexuality being normal -no legitimate arguments meriting the homosexualization of society are possible...

No moral realtive arguments -no, EVEN villifying David Parker does not change one iota the disordered nature of homosexuality and society's rejection of it...

[MACVSOG68]

You, You, You. That is the extent of all your arguments. Can't debate, so denigrate.

All you do on the David Parker threads is the very thing you whine about in this posting

You mean posting the truth? Even your boy Parker has apparently given up on the story. I think you, Townhall and WND are about the only ones left. But hang in there. Nifong is...

You need to come to grips with reality -- There is NOTHING that can support the illegitimate fallacy of homosexuality being normal -no legitimate arguments meriting the homosexualization of society are possible...

LOL. You are so used to posting 10 or 15 of these threads a day, you get a tad lost. This is about Parker and the lies about the abduction and beating of his boy, not about homosexuality. Get a grip.

No moral realtive arguments -no, EVEN villifying David Parker does not change one iota the disordered nature of homosexuality and society's rejection of it...

Well if the truth is moral relativism to you, color me a moral relativist.

[308MBR]

Why is he sending is kid to public school anyhow?

If you don't want your kid force fed the gay agenda, radical environmentalism, trusting the government in all things, and feeling guilty about America's past, don't send the kid to a public school.

Don't come to me with that freaky stuff about how "your school is different". They are all owned and operated by the socialists in the NEA/AFT unions.

[Antoninus]

This article from the "Glob" is heavily derivative of the anti-Parker press-release put out by the local homo-promo agit-prop group.

Not that I'm in any way surprised.

[ReignOfError]

And since he'll be outnumbered, teach him to crush a trachea or snap fingers and wrists.

[...]

For any here who believe this post inappropriate - I envy your peaceful childhood.

Holy crap! I wouldn't call my childhood peaceful, but it never escalated to lethal force.

My dad taught me to fight dirty. Knee to the groin, head-butt to the bridge of the nose, sweep a knee, that kind of thing. While the big guy (Dad's 5'3", I topped out at 5'4") is showing off, the little guy has only one goal -- to walk away.

That said, I talked my way out of more fights than I sucker-punched my way out of. "Wow. Just the three of you against one guy a full head shorter? You're awfully brave. Your parents must be so proud." When the bully's goal is to impress the crowd at the playground, hearing the crowd snicker really takes the wind out of his sails.

[Antoninus]

Do a Google search for the author of this article as well. Seems to have an interest in writing about "gay" issues. Hmmmm.

[Antoninus]

Hey, just so we're on the up-and-up here, I'd like to know your opinion on homosexual acts. Personally, I find them disgusting, unnatural, wrong, and gross. Such acts should NEVER be presented to children as correct, proper, natural, or good.

Do you agree? This school certainly doesn't.

[Peach]

Good points, Mac. I've been laughing for two days now that some posters seem to think their agenda is more important than the truth.

And when we post the truth, complete with links, they go ballistic and have to resort to distortions and outright lies. It's pretty sad actually.

[MACVSOG68]

Hey, just so we're on the up-and-up here, I'd like to know your opinion on homosexual acts. Personally, I find them disgusting, unnatural, wrong, and gross. Such acts should NEVER be presented to children as correct, proper, natural, or good.

Antoninus, you don't want my opinion on anything. That you tell me yours unsolicited is fine, but irrelevant to this discussion. I assume since you didn't list "truth" as one of your values, that it too is irrelevant.

[Antoninus]

Antoninus, you don't want my opinion on anything. That you tell me yours unsolicited is fine, but irrelevant to this discussion. I assume since you didn't list "truth" as one of your values, that it too is irrelevant.

It's completely relevant. You won't give your opinion because you want to appear to be just another open-minded anonmymous poster--not the shill for the "gay" agenda that most of us know you to be.

[MACVSOG68]

Very true. If only they had such staying power over something of real significance such as the next election, we might actually win in November.

[Antoninus]

From another thread on the Parkers: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170599,00.html

The Culture War's Battle of Lexington
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
By Wendy Mcelroy

(excerpt)

The second Battle of Lexington illustrates several common characteristics of the culture war.

They include:

The conflict is fundamental and admits no compromise. Parker believes that parents, not government, have the right to teach moral and sexual values to their children. Estabrook assumes a duty to teach the values of "diversity." The adults involved have core beliefs that conflict, and there is only one child.

Short of a Solomon's Knife solution, which slices a baby in half, no compromise is possible. If the law enforces compromise, neither side will be satisfied and the fight for total victory will probably continue.

Another characteristic: agendas are attached to the dispute, drawing attention from the basic issue. Tammy Mosher from Concerned Women for America stated, "What's getting lost…is parental rights and parental notification as it pertains to education."

The basic conflict is not over same-sex marriage, to which anti-Parker activists have shifted the ground.

Indeed, some advocates of "diversity" claim that Parker's demand for parental rights are nothing more than an expression of hatred toward gays. The accusation illustrates another characteristic of the culture war: arguments are mixed with vicious personal attacks and, often, overwhelmed by them. Each side ascribes the worst possible motives to the other.

Neither acknowledges that the "enemy" might be a decent human being who simply disagrees. Demonizing the enemy is another reason why compromise is not possible. It becomes a deal with the devil.

It also stokes the emotions, making physical violence more likely.

On Sept. 6, Parker supporters rallied on the historic Lexington Battle Green. According to reports, pro-gay activists gathered in a counter demonstration. The media then arrived. The presence of media often acts as a catalyst because activists know it favors flash over substance, and tensions on the green became inflamed. Ultimately, the police were called to the scene.

Finally, culture warriors are often unwilling to work out difficulties privately, preferring to involve police and the courts almost from the word "go."

There is no way to accurately judge who's right in the culture war without examining the facts. Both sides can make valid points, and who's right often shifts with the tactics they employ.

Nevertheless, when I need to make a snap judgement — one I discard upon deeper examination — then I follow a few crude guidelines.

My preliminary bias is:

—Against the first one to call the police (if no violence occurred);

—Against anyone whose income depends on the outcome;

—Against someone who attaches a broader agenda or shifts the ground of discussion;

—For anyone who argues rather than insults;

—For those calling for a private resolution.

My preliminary bias can easily dissolve in the presence of a compelling fact to the contrary. Upon examining the Parker matter, my initial impression stood.

The Estabrook authorities, for whom "diversity" is part of a paycheck, called the police on Parker. School supporters portray Parker as an anti-gay bigot and attach a same-sex agenda to his basic demand for parental rights, thus shifting the ground of debate.

Meanwhile, Parker argues without insults. He was the one arrested at the school, and the one in danger of physical violence at the demonstration. Moreover, Parker's lawyer is calling for a private resolution; that is, the school should drop the restraining order, which has become a pivotal point. Estabrook refuses to negotiate.

A last word on the culture war. Most elected officials will hide from the controversy.

The most plausible explanation for the delay in Parker's trial comes from Agape Press.

"The district attorney…is running for State Attorney General" and he wants to hammer out a plea bargain to make the controversy go away.

The resolution is unlikely. The Superintendent of Schools claims he's had no time to decide about the restraining order even though the issue has dragged on for months.

For his part, Parker seems willing to go to the Supreme Court. This returns to the culture war's first characteristic: no compromise.

Wendy McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com and a research fellow for The Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of many books and articles, including the new book, "Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century" (Ivan R. Dee/Independent Institute, 2002). She lives with her husband in Canada.

It looks to me like some of the "anti-Parker activists" cited in the above article have found their way over to FR.

[Peach]

Activism and elections? Oh, no, freepers are having too much fun denigrating other freepers who don't think EXACTLY what they think.

The left must be just delighted that freepers have given up doing actual research in favor of attacking other freepers.

[Antoninus]

And when we post the truth, complete with links, they go ballistic and have to resort to distortions and outright lies. It's pretty sad actually.

Truth? You post articles based on an attack press-release put out by the homo group at the center of this controversy and call it 'truth'?

It truly is scary how many people are so easily taken in by the propaganda of the "gay" left.