Town wants suit dropped (government interest outweighs David Parker's parental rights)

Town wants suit dropped By Bethan L. Jones/ Staff Writer Thursday, August 24, 2006 - Updated: 08:18 AM EST

Last week, the town of Lexington filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against School Committee members, former interim Superintendent William Hurley and current Superintendent Paul Ash, as well as a series of Lexington teachers.

David Parker and his wife Tonia, along with Robb and Robin Wirthlin, filed a federal complaint against Lexington on the one-year anniversary of David Parker’s arrest at Estabrook Elementary School last April, alleging the town violated their civil rights by denying both families the option to remove their children from any kind of discussion which included homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

The town motion, which was filed last Tuesday, stated staff at the Estabrook school did "not unreasonably interfere with or place an unlawful burden on the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights" further adding the "legitimate governmental interest in providing an appropriate public education to all school-age children ... outweighs plaintiffs’ rights to tailor the public school curriculum to suit their personal morals or beliefs."

The original suit against the Lexington Public Schools alleged the schools practiced "indoctrination techniques" which violated the families’ rights to exercise free religion, violated their civil rights by using "threats, intimidation and coercion," violated the Massachusetts "opt-out" statute which allows parents to remove their children from discussions about human sexuality and the town "conspired to deprive the plaintiffs of their due process rights."

"We think the case really has no merit," said Kevin Bott, assistant town counsel, who works for Anderson & Krieger, LLP. Bott added the motion is intended to dismiss the case before it has the potential for dragging on and becoming a "huge distraction to the school system."

Bott said the LPS have a "very diverse school policy" which exposes students to a wide range of ideas and cultures. Bott also said parents have the right to remove their children from public school and enroll them in a privately funded school which better reflects their religious or moral leanings.

"No court has ever said parents have the right to tell the public schools what should be in the curriculum," he said.

Neil Tassel, the Parker family’s attorney said he and other counsel from Denner O’Malley, which is representing both families, are "working on our opposition," which he expects will be filed in early September. Tassel said the motion to dismiss was expected by the plaintiffs.

On whether the judge will decide to keep the case in the system, Tassel said the legal team and the two families "feel as good as the facts allow us to feel."

After the opposition motion is filed, a hearing will be scheduled to determine the fate of the lawsuit.

David Parker was arrested in April 2005 for trespassing after he refused to leave a meeting with then-Estabrook Principal Joni Jay and then-Director of Curriculum Andre Ravenelle. The Parkers objected to the book "Who’s in a Family" inside a diversity book bag brought home by their son, who was then in kindergarten. Among the illustrations of different family makeups were same-sex-headed families.

And this from email alert:

Defendants in David Parker's Federal Civil Rights lawsuit file 57-page motion to dismiss case.

School Committee, Superintendent, teachers, Town of Lexington claim that presenting homosexuality to children against parents' wishes is NOT illegal and does NOT interfere with freedom of religion!

Claims that because of gay 'marriage' in Massachusetts, state has "legitimate interest" in presenting homosexuality to children.

Claims that Parental Notification Law does not apply.

Compares parents' religious rights to American Indians smoking peyote!

And more -- a skillful twisting and mangling of legal "precedent" to rob parents and children of all rights and protections from the homosexual agenda in the schools!

This landmark federal case could affect the entire country!!!

Defendants in David Parker's Federal Civil Rights lawsuit file 57-page motion to dismiss case. School Committee, Superintendent, teachers, Town of Lexington claim that presenting homosexuality to children against parents' wishes is NOT illegal and does NOT interfere with freedom of religion! ===

The ugly battle about pushing the homosexual agenda on young children is about to come right out into the open, front and center.

We are now seeing an Orwellian nightmare unfold before our eyes -- a serious legal claim that schools have a legal and constitutional mandate to unconditionally teach homosexuality to even the youngest of children, and that parents have no right whatsoever to interfere with that.

On Tuesday the defendants in David Parker's federal Civil Rights lawsuit issued a blistering 57-page Motion to Dismiss, making dramatic legal claims that, if allowed to stand, could reverberate across the entire country.

The lawsuit

You will recall that this past April 27 -- exactly one year after David Parker's unbelievable arrest and night in jail -- that the Parkers and Wirthlins formally filed a major Federal Civil Rights lawsuit against eleven teachers and public school officials in Lexington, Massachusetts, including the School Committee and the Superintendent, and others.

David Parker had been arrested over the school's refusal to notify him when teachers and staff discuss homosexuality or transgenderism with his 6-year-old son in Kindergarten. School officials, led by the Superintendent, Paul Ash, have continued to publicly defy any and all requests that parents be notified and given the opportunity to opt out their children when adults discuss homosexual issues with them -- or even let the parents know after the fact that it had happened. (This despite the state law -- which we wrote -- that specifically gives parents those rights.) Ash and School Committee chairman Helen Cohen hve been particularly vehement against David Parker personally, denouncing him in the media on many occasions. And to rub it in even more, the book "Who's In a Family", about same-sex relationships, was permanently placed in David Parker's son's first-grade classroom this year.

Also this year, in that same elementary school, the Wirthlins' son's second-grade teacher read to the class the book "King and King", which graphically depicts a romantic homosexual relationship between two men. When the Wirthlins complained, the teacher and principal reiterated that the Wirthlins had no choice in the matter of their son being introduced to homosexual relationships by the school, and that their religious beliefs regarding homosexuality had no consequence Thus, the Wirthlins joined the Parkers in the federal lawsuit.

For links to: Background information, David Parker's arrest, King and King, and the text of the federal Civil Rights lawsuit -- at our home page at:
http://www.massresistance.org

The motion to dismiss: The law turned inside out; a brave new world

"Orwellian" is the only word we could think of to describe this. Is this actually happening in the United States of America? They re-define the process of pushing homosexuality on young children and attempting to normalize it in their young minds, despite the strong objections of their parents, in a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland language that brings to mind something like a North Korean re-education camp.

They state that normalizing homosexual relations to children is "promoting acceptance of diversity and elimination of discrimination against minorities, including gays and lesbians". They state that parents who want to opt out their children are attempting to "control the flow of information and the curriculum of public schools."

And they follow that up with the absurd statement that

"[The] defendants' legitimate governmental interest in providing an appropriate public education to all school-age children within the Town of Lexington outweighs plaintiffs' rights to tailor the public school curriculum to suit their personal morals or beliefs, to dictate how or when certain subjects may be taught to their children, or to control the flow of age-appropriate information regarding diversity or family composition, including same sex parents."

This is insanity. It's turning the whole issue inside out. They even compare parents' rights to determine the moral upbringing of their children to a allowing American Indians to smoke peyote. This goes on and on.

And of course, they claim that the Parental Notification Law could not possibly apply here for all kinds of reasons, chiefly because of a re-definition of the English language, that homosexuality or homosexual relationships is no longer a "human sexuality issue" but instead an issue of tolerance and diversity. So there!

Read the entire 57-page Motion to Dismiss here (pdf format):
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/federal_lawsuit/MotionToDismiss.pdf

How outrageous does it get? This illustration below is a page from the book "King and King", which was read in class to the Wirthlin's second-grader and other kids. This page is included in the defendant's Motion to Dismiss as "Exhibit A." The defendants state that this is not about a "moral belief system" as the Wirthlins claim, but instead they declare that it's simply the "celebration of diversity". And furthermore, they state, "The plaintiffs recognize (as they must) that Massachusetts endorses marriage between same-sex couples."

To back it up its revolutionary assertions the document goes on for pages and pages with references to obscure (and some more well-known) legal decisions. To be sure, you can certainly find enough horrid decisions, or portions of decisions, by crazed judges or juries over the years to cobble together anything you want. And boy, do they ever!

In a further attempt to legitimize their actions, they also dredge up some long-forgotten but very radical "recommendations" by the pro-gay activists at the Department of Education. For example, do you remember earlier this year, when Planned Parenthood attempted to write into law, as Bill 1641, the outrageous 1999 Comprehensive Health Curriculum frameworks by the Department of Education? Yup, they're included here as "Exhibit B", even though almost no one ever has paid any serious attention to them.

And "Exhibit C" is a bizarre opinion written by DOE Commissioner David Driscoll a few years back on a gay-related issue, which Paul Ash has attempted to use as a hammer against the Parkers and other parents. The DOE has done its best to make any adjudication process as long, painful, and agonizing as possible for parents. In ten years, we don't know of any parent with a complaint that's ever made it through with a positive result.

This may seem unbelievable to you. But this is deadly serious. Someday this could all be used against YOU!

What happens next

The next step is a formal rebuttal to this Motion for Dismissal, now being prepared by David Parker's lawyers.

It is due around Labor day. After that, the next step is for federal Judge Mark Wolf to decide whether to (a) dismiss the case -- and thus the Parkers (and parents across the country) would lose everything -- or (b) allow it to stand trial. This is an incredibly important decision, obviously. We think it will come reasonably quickly after Labor Day. Our bet is that the trial will be allowed to take place, but that's just an intelligent guess. We have a lot of confidence in Denner & Associates, Parker's legal team, that they can successfully carry this through, if it's allowed to go to trial. Pretty scary stuff.

We will be there to inform you when anything happens!

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.