“I’m a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son that gay marriage is OK.”
Those who keep up with this blog and have read my book, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, know that NOM is referring to the David Parker controversy in which Parker, a Massachusetts parent, claimed that he was unfairly arrested because he didn't want his son's school to "teach" him homosexuality.
The claim is a huge lie. Earlier this week, Box Turtle Bulletin already covered the truth of this situation, but I want to go into more detail. This is a reprint from an earlier post and my book:
Distortion—David Parker objected to his child being exposed to homosexuality because it was an issue of sexuality and Joseph Estabrook Elementary refused to accommodate him
Truth—In a January 17, 2005 email to the school, Parker said: “There is a book included entitled, Who’s in a Family (with pictures) that include lesbian and homosexual couples with children—implicitly equating this family structure as a morally equal alternative to other family constructs. We stand firmly against this book or any other subject matter pertaining to homosexuality ever being indoctrinated to our child, discussed in school, or sent home. We don’t believe gay parents constitute a spiritually healthy family and should not be celebrated.”
Joseph Estabrook Elementary principal, Joni Jay, wrote Parker an email clearly saying homosexuality is not a part of the kindergarten curriculum. She also said she cannot control what students say to one another and that many children attending Joseph Estabrook Elementary live in same-sex households.
Point of fact: The entire controversy began because Parker’s son brought home a “diversity bookbag” with several items in it. Among them was a book showing certain types of families, including same-sex families. It was the only book in the packet that talked about anything of a homosexual nature.
Distortion—Parker was well within his rights because Massachusetts laws says parents must give permission to have their children discuss any issue involving human sexuality.
Truth—Parker was not well within his right because discussions of differing families, including gay-led households are not included in the parental notification policy. This is because it is not an issue about human sexuality. Principal Jay informed Parker of this on March 4, 2005. Jay said she confirmed this with the district assistant superintendent and the director of Health Education. She was answering an email in which Parker said that neither he nor his wife authorize any teacher or adult to “expose” his sons (Parker has two sons) to “any sexual orientation/homosexual material/same sex unions between parents.”
Point of fact: The night before Parker’s arrest, he addressed the Lexington School Committee during their public meeting. In his speech, he attempted to link gay-led households to sexual behavior:
“Children who are successfully indoctrinated that same-sex marriage is normal and correct will eventually understand that sexual intimacy is a part of this union. Let’s not be naive about the implied human sexuality aspect of same-sex unions. Let’s be honest with ourselves. When we accept same-sex unions, we accept its implied . . . sexual intimacy. These concepts are indeed inextricably linked.”
Distortion—David Parker was arrested because Joseph Estabrook Elementary did not respect his rights as a parent.
Truth—David Parker was arrested for trespassing. Even though his initial questions were answered, Parker persisted and finally received another meeting with school officials. According to a press release issued by William J. Hurley, Interim Superintendent of Schools and Christopher Casey, Chief of Police in Lexington, Parker and his wife requested that the school, in the future, ensure that teachers automatically remove their children from discussions of same-sex households, even if the issue rises spontaneously. It was explained to Parker and his wife that the policy allowing students to opt out of discussions of human sexuality was not relevant here and the Parkers’ request was “not practical” because children could discuss “such matters among themselves at school.”
When Parker and his wife were told that they could appeal the response to the Commissioner of Education, Parker did not want to. It was then that the two decided not to leave the school. The Lexington Police were called. Parker’s wife went to the couple’s car but he stayed. Two plain-clothed detectives came at 5:20 p.m. and a police lieutenant came at 6 p.m. All asked Parker to leave but he refused.
Distortion—David Parker did not intentionally get arrested. According to his lawyer, Jeffrey Denner:
“He (Parker) was invited to come in, he came in, there was a dialogue going back and forth, there were faxes sent back and forth to the school committee. His intent was not to get arrested. His intent was to establish a dialogue to protect his own children and other children as well.”—Father faces trial over school’s ‘pro-gay’ book, WorldNetDaily, August 4, 2005
Truth—According to the press release submitted by Hurley and Casey, Parker said “If I’m not under arrest, then I’m not leaving.” The press release also said Parker began calling people on his cell phone and a small group of people began arriving with cameras. Parker was finally arrested at 6:24 p.m. The group with the camera was waiting behind the police station and photographed his arrival.
Mass Resistance (Massachusetts conservative group) claimed that Parker was using his cell phone in order to keep his wife up to date with the meeting while she sat in the couple’s car.
Point of fact: There are pictures of Parker being arrested and led away by police on the Mass Resistance web page. Now how could any of this have happened by chance? For that matter, there are pictures of Parker addressing the Lexington School Committee the night before his arrest. The fact that these pictures are on the web page do give an impression of premeditation by Parker and Mass Resistance.
Distortion—David Parker got into this fight solely because of his concern for his children and what they are being exposed to in school.
Truth—Since his arrest, Parker has been speaking against gay rights in other states. On June 13 and 14 of that same year, he was the speaker in a six-town “Wake UP Maine” tour with Brian Camenker, the head of Mass Resistance. The purpose was to aid a Maine referendum against the recently passed bill outlawing discrimination against the gay community. A flyer was distributed showing Parker in handcuffs. The flyer also claimed that Parker “questioned the homosexual rights movement.”
The image of Parker in handcuffs had made its way around several web pages like some sort of bastardized picture of Che Gueverra. He also appeared in a commercial in another effort to overturn the Maine anti-discrimination bill.
And then don’t forget this interesting addendum:
In May 2006, Parker’s son was involved in a fi ght at school with a friend over seating in the school cafeteria. His son and the other student made peace with each other and continued to be friends. They even had a play date later that week. In addition, Parker was informed as to what happened.
However, less than a month later, the Mass Resistance sent out a press release claiming that Parker’s son was set upon by eight to 10 students who did not appreciate his fight against Joseph Estabrook Elementary. The press release generated considerable buzz with the anti-gay industry, as it was either run or referenced by many so-called “pro-family” web pages, including the Traditional Values Coalition and Concerned Women for America.
Joseph Estabrook Elementary School explained the true story in a press release. However, none of the so-called “pro-family” groups, including Mass Resistance and the Traditional Values Coalition, apologized for any of their claims about a conspiracy to hurt Parker’s son nor did they correct the error.
Articles and web pages used for this post:
www.massresistance.org
www.lexingtoncares.org
www.davidparkerfund.org/
Arrested father had point to make, The Boston Globe, April 29, 2005
Wake UP Maine Tour announced, www.MaineToday.com, June 10, 2005
Massachusetts Men Speak Against Homosexual Rights, www.MaineToday.com,
June 14, 2004
Coalition for Marriage to host David Parker at Littlefi eld Baptist Church, www.
MaineToday.com, November 3, 2005
Father faces trial over school’s ‘pro-gay’ book, WorldNetDaily, August 4, 2005
Report: Christian Parent Arrested After Being Denied Say-Son in Son’s Education,
Agape Press, April 28, 2005
Dad Becomes Icon in Battle over Homosexual Agenda in Schools, Agape Press,
May 18, 2005
School dispute persists after plea deal is struck, The Boston Globe, October 27, 2005
Press release, Lexington Public Schools, May 2, 2005
David Parker’s Son Beaten Up on the Playground, Traditional Values Coalition,
June 15, 2006
New liberal strategy: Assault 7-year-olds, Kevin McCullough, June 16, 2006
Press release, Lexington Public Schools, June 16, 2006
7 comments:
Thank you for such an excellently detailed post!
Truth:
If a parent doesn't want their child to be taught about homosexuality than the school shouldn't be sending home a book about homosexuality and children shouldn't even be talking about sexual things until they are at least 8 and have developed their identity ... US culture is really messed ... no school or govt has the right to tell a parent they are going to teach whatever they want without consent
Truth:
Parents should always have the right to know what their children are being taught and the right to opt out. Sexual topics in a kindergarten class are totally inappropriate ... anyone who has had a child development class knows a child hasn't even formed their identity by that age ... just because people are pushing this agenda to gain acceptance doesn't mean there will be any change in acceptance ... quite the contrary, it will just push people the other direction ... sad when people think they can force people to change
if you really believed in freedom you wouldn't have a owner approval on your blog either
Anonymous,
Certainly, "sexual topics" should not be discussed in a kindergarten class. That being said, I hope you don't think that a child talking about his or her same-sex parents is the same thing as a sexual topic because it is not. You also speak about parents as being heterosexual, ignoring the simple fact that same-parenting exists. It's not about "gaining acceptance." It's about basic fairness.
Sorry but gotta keep down the spam. If you don't like what I do on my blog, you are welcomed not to read it.
Here the thing, anonymous. The book was not about homosexuality but different families. There was only one same-sex family in the book. Also, Parker could have originally opted his child out from receiving the book, but he did not. Lots of talk coming from you, but not enough knowledge.
Post a Comment