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"