Posted on 06/21/2006 5:59:32 AM PDT by seanmerc
Where’s The Outrage Over The Beating Of David Parker’s Son?
By Rev. Louis P. Sheldon Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition
The mainstream media has ignored a major news story out of Massachusetts involving a first grader who was dragged and beaten on the playground at Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington. His crime? He is the son of David Parker, a concerned parent who objects to his son being taught about homosexuality. School officials have admitted that the attack on his son was planned and premeditated!
In April, 2005, Parker met with the Estabrook principal and the director of education over the promotion of homosexuality in the classroom. He asked to be notified in advanced about any pro-homosexual teachings so he could pull his child out of the class. He then refused to leave the office until they agreed to his request. They called the police and had him arrested for “trespassing” instead. He was handcuffed and spent a night in jail before facing a judge.
Ever since his arrest for trespassing, he and his family have been the victims of a pro-homosexual smear campaign in Lexington. In this latest attack, Parker’s first grader was assaulted on the playground by eight to ten children on the second anniversary of the imposition of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts by the Supreme Judicial Court.
These young hoodlums surrounded Parker’s son on the playground, threw him against a wall and began punching him in the chest, stomach, and genital area. As he fell to the ground, one of the thugs said, “Now you can finish him off.” Fortunately, one girl ran to get a playground aide to stop the beating.
My good friend Brian Camenker, who heads MassResistance, is one of the few individuals to report on this hateful assault on David Parker’s son. Where are the outcries against “hate crimes” by liberal journalists? Where are the candlelight vigils on behalf of his son? Has Parker been invited to tell his story on Good Morning, America? Of course, not. Liberal hatred directed against a first grader isn’t apparently considered “hate,” but justice directed at the son of a “homophobic” parent.
Estabrook Elementary School’s leadership is apparently captive to the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), which sets up programs to make schools “safe” for students who think they are homosexuals. While GLSEN may make schools “safe” for homosexual recruitment programs, it obviously does not make schools safe for children who do not wish to be indoctrinated into thinking that homosexual conduct is normal or healthy. David Parker’s son is a chilling example of what may happen to other children whose parents oppose the normalization of homosexual sex among kids. Are schools to become unsafe places for these children?
It is time for Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to step up and be counted. He has expressed support for a federal marriage amendment that defines marriage as a one-man, one-woman union as the best protector of children. He should also put his convictions on the line by launching a thorough investigation into this hate-filled assault on David Parker’s son.
Gov. Romney should find out if pro-homosexual parents encouraged their children to beat up Parker’s son, to make sure the hoodlums who assaulted this child are punished, and to assure that all schools in Massachusetts are “safe” places for children who think homosexual behaviors are abnormal and physically dangerous. If parents encouraged this beating, they should be prosecuted as accessories to a crime.
In my view, David Parker is one of the most courageous individuals in America. He has had the courage to take on the homosexual activist movement and to protest against the recruitment of children into life-threatening homosexual behaviors. He should be honored, not vilified—and his son should not fear being beaten up on the playground.
What has happened to David Parker and his son is a frightening example of what will occur to anyone who openly opposes the homosexualization of our nation’s children. This injustice against Parker and his family must be corrected—and Governor Mitt Romney should take a leadership role in seeing that justice is done—and making certain that all children are safe in Massachusetts schools – not just sexually confused children who are being recruited into the homosexual lifestyle.
More related to David Parker.
You're wasting your time. You have these NON-THINKING robots, that just can't understand that every time one of these bogus stories go forth, the credibily of all of us on this side is damaged. That's why its important to do self-policing.
Thank you for the ping.
"You're wasting your time. You have these NON-THINKING robots, that just can't understand that every time one of these bogus stories go forth, the credibily of all of us on this side is damaged. That's why its important to do self-policing."
I can see you're right. What's really amusing is that if you go look at post 18, Antoninus in his reply to me (first option) seriously proposed a scenario that I was going to list as a joke -- school officials employing little kids to beat the Parker boy. Amazing.
I think Parker had every right to go in 14 months ago and demand the opt-out and he deserved a better answer than he got. But this latest thing is either crazy paranoia or grasping for publicity.
Now let's see, who else can we think of who's shamelessly using his or her child for publicity?
Wonder if that's because you pulled out an article that was 9 months old? Perhaps you could explain to us buddies exactly what the relevance is to the issue of this thread which is the bogus story of the abduction and beating of the Parker boy? Help us all out here.
I suggest you seek first to understand then to be understood...
If you get beyond the headline and read the complete posting you will note that the issue of this thread entails the complete history of David Parker opposing the homosexual agenda in the public school system...
As much as you would like to imply Mr. Parker's son was not led to a secluded area by others -it happened. As much as you would like to imply the beating did not happen -it did. Even if refering to what I consider to be the biased investigative report from the School administration puiblished by the Superintendent one can see it did in fact happen:
PRESS RELEASE: June 16, 2006On 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.
-far from bogus...
As to what the issue or issues are here is really a matter of perspective -I see one camp that opposes the homosexual agenda and as such supporting David Parker's efforts AND see another camp that simply wishes to villify David Parker without comment on anything else... (may I suggest this camp start an anti-David Parker ping list on DU rather than persisitently hijacking homosexual agenda topics involving Mr. Parker to push the villify David Parker agenda)
Anyway, the issue involves far more than the diversionary and irrelevant straw men you attempt to repeatedly hoist up in your crusade to villify Mr. David Parker... e.g. David Parker arrested himself...
Post #19 sums up quite well what you attempt e.g. "The accusation illustrates another characteristic of the culture war: arguments are mixed with vicious personal attacks"
BTTT.
If anyone trusts the MSM to report the facts in an impartial mannter on this or any issue that has anything at all to do with the homosexual agenda, then I've got some great deals for you!
Just freepmail me or my agents in Nigeria for details.
Addendum - this Fox article isn't bad at all. But I can imagine the press in MA.
Initial Report by Mass Resistance
About halfway down you'll see a statement by David Parker that starts out with:
We understand that skirmishes happen on the playground. What concerns us greatly is the premeditated, well planned and coordinated nature of the assault.That definitely seems to be at odds with what some of your detractors have said.
And then there is: June 19, 2006 email update
Sorry if this has already been brought to attention.
Hey, that's real cute DB. Did you make that up all by yourself? No, of course not.
If you get beyond the headline and read the complete posting you will note that the issue of this thread entails the complete history of David Parker opposing the homosexual agenda in the public school system...
Yes I read the article. The issue was about the "beating" of the boy, and whether Parker's infamous history led to it. But you and your friends, now knowing the original articles have been completely debunked, can only go back to the Parker crusade of a year ago, which is not the issue. Wonder why no one on your side seems a bit concerned about the boy?
As much as you would like to imply Mr. Parker's son was not led to a secluded area by others -it happened.
I implied nothing. I said he was not dragged behind the school by a group of boys encouraged by their gay loving parents planned well in advance. You don't see a difference?
As much as you would like to imply the beating did not happen -it did.
I didn't say there were no punches thrown. I said he was not beaten repeatedly by 8 to 10 boys, who after he was down, kicked him, and then someone said "Let's finish him off". You don't see any difference?
And so much for the story that it was planned well in advance (1st graders?) and encouraged by the adults. Are you telling me that your repeated embrace of the original article has now softened a bit to the realization that perhaps the real story is somewhat different?
As to what the issue or issues are here is really a matter of perspective -I see one camp that opposes the homosexual agenda and as such supporting David Parker's efforts AND see another camp that simply wishes to villify David Parker without comment on anything else...
Without comment? It appears the truth camp is the only one commenting. As for vilification, your little group invented the term. I would love to simply discuss the whole issue without the personal attacks. Try it sometime.
(may I suggest this camp start an anti-David Parker ping list on DU rather than persisitently hijacking homosexual agenda topics involving Mr. Parker to push the villify David Parker agenda)
So questioning the truth and substance of an article posted is hijacking? We've been trying to discuss the alleged abduction and beating of Jacob, while you folks want to talk about homosexual agendas. Who's doing the hijacking?
Anyway, the issue involves far more than the diversionary and irrelevant straw men you attempt to repeatedly hoist up in your crusade to villify Mr. David Parker... e.g. David Parker arrested himself...
Ah yes, the old "truth is just a straw-man" routine. You use that term a lot. You might just look up the meaning some time. Saves a bit of embarrassment.
Post #19 sums up quite well what you attempt e.g. "The accusation illustrates another characteristic of the culture war: arguments are mixed with vicious personal attacks"
Tell you what DB, you list all the personal attacks by those who questioned this story, and I'll list all of them by you and your friends. Deal?
So tell me which seems more likely to you:
1) A bunch of 6-year-olds got together and decide they hate Parker because his daddy raised a stink at the school 14 months ago and daddy doesn't love homos like he's supposed to so they beat the boy up, or...
2) The Parker boy and another kid got in a silly argument over a lunch seat and they took it out to the playground. Then daddy and some of his supporters decide to use the incident for political purposes, following the example of a bunch of liberals we know.
If you vote for number 1 I have lots of swampland -- oops, luxury water property -- I want to talk to you about.
Damn, this pisses me off. I can't believe that conservatives are "stretching a story". Are you sure?
I tend to favor David Parker's version...
Even the version from what I consider to be the biased investigative report from the School administration published by the Superintendent confirms it was a premeditated, well planned and coordinated assault: Even if referring to what I consider to be the biased investigative report from the School administration published by the Superintendent one can see it did in fact happen:
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.
premeditated - "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 was waiting
well planned - "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" -evident by the premeditated coordination
coordinated - "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 students worked together...
assault - "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" clearly an assault...
Of course I can't be absolutely sure. I'm not going to pretend I know any more than anybody else for certain. But my opinion is that it's very unlikely that kids this young are part of a scheme cooked up by parents or administrators to get this boy. If the kids were older maybe, but at this age? Yes, I think the truth is being stretched or warped. So do a lot of other people on FR.
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.