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"
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?