Tuesday, June 27, 2006
(WeeklyColumn)(Political Parent, David Parker)
The recent scene portrayed by Concerned Women For America in a
web article was chilling. The group wrote, "A mob of schoolchildren seized and beat the 7-year old son of pro-family activist David Parker behind his school,
Estabrook Elementary, in Lexington, Massachusetts, on the second anniversary of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts." Concerned Women went on to say that the victim, first grader Jacob Parker, "apparently is feeling the heat for his father's opposition to forced homosexual education."
"When you tell children over and over that opposing homosexuality amounts to hatred, you're setting some kids up for this sort of abuse," said Robert Knight, Director of Concerned Women for America's Culture & Family Institute. "The school posted numerous slanted articles in the school library about Mr. Parker's dispute with authorities, and some parents went out of their way to stir up hatred toward Parker and his family."
There is only one small problem with this horror story: It is a
fabrication so fictitious it could have been written by Stephen King. Virtually nothing is true and the distortions are a deliberate attempt to smear a school district, intimidate administrators and influence a curriculum that has the temerity to suggest that gay families exist and should be treated with respect.
The
trouble started in early 2005 when David Parker, a parent tied to the right wing political group
Mass Resistance, was upset with the school's pro-gay curriculum. He sent a series of unpleasant e-mails to Estabrook's principal, Joni Jay, saying that he did not want his son exposed to "beliefs contrary to the Word of God in our Christian faith."
On April 27, 2005, Parker met with Jay and presented the principal with a series of demands, refusing to leave campus until they were met. After three hours of protesting, Parker was finally arrested. As part of a headline-grabbing publicity stunt, Parker refused to post bail and spent the night in jail. More recently, Parker sued the school district in Federal court over the issue of teaching tolerance in schools.
While he likes to portray himself in the press as simply a father, he is really
an extremist who cares more about
politics than parenting. A newly minted martyr, Parker joined Mass Resistance leader Brian Camenker for six appearances in Maine in an effort to undo an anti-discrimination law in the Lobster State.
With a defeat in Maine and growing acceptance of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, Parker apparently grew desperate for notoriety, which leads us to the first grade "mob" scene. I interviewed Paul Ash, Superintendent of Schools, about the incident, reviewed his official report and found that the facts presented are not consistent with the way the incident has been reported by the right wing "media."
Indeed, to ensure he could not be accused of a conflict of interest for investigating one of his own schools, Ash formally asked the Lexington Police Department, the Middlesex District Attorney and the Department of Social Services to intervene. All three agencies swiftly concluded that the sensationalistic accusations were without merit.
For example, the "mob" of children turned out to be only one child, a friend of Jacob's. Not long after the fight, Jacob went over the friend's house for a play date. The motive for the fisticuffs had nothing to do with David Parker's anti-gay activism, but was a "disagreement over who would sit where in the cafeteria."
This is hardly the violent liberal conspiracy darkly and breathlessly portrayed by the extreme right. Still, the facts did not get in the way of the right wing launching a vicious
smear campaign full of inconsistencies and innuendo. The garbage spewed by Concerned Women for America and
Mass Resistance was also eagerly reported by
Rev. Lou Sheldon of the Traditional Values Coalition. This created a feeding frenzied
echo chamber, where zealots across the globe were duped into believing that school officials had conspired with progressive parents to have a mob of children punish a conservative father by pummeling his son.
Similar to the right's intimidation campaign against Michael Schiavo, the yelling yahoos were provided with Ash's
personal information. "I have received hundreds of e-mails, many of them threatening," Ash told me in our interview. "I even got an angry call from Japan at 4AM. It is one thing to attack my opinion, but this is a blatant attempt to terrorize."
I asked the Superintendent if there was any validity to the right wing's claims. "Zero, this is
complete bull," Ash explained. "What these groups have done is taken a playground fight and used it for political goals."
Instead of focusing on the three R's, the school district now has to waste its time defending itself against the right wing's three D's: Deceit, Dishonesty and Deception.
24 Comments:
As usual the rapture-right doesnt practice the dictates of their own religion which they're constantly trying to force down other peoples throats. Doesnt it say something about not bearing false witness?! Thou shalt not be a lyin' sack of shit!!
B. Queer
posted by , at
6/27/2006 11:55 AM
Off topic--ROFL--check out news story on yahoo about rush limbaugh being arrested at the airport for non-prescription viagra in his bag. He was returning from the Dominican Republic--i wonder who he was molesting down there.
posted by , at
6/27/2006 12:28 PM
These Christians have a lie factory that would do old-time Comintern propagandists like Willi Muenzenberg and Otto Katz proud.
Orwell's comment on the above was that "it was not merely false; it did not even have the usual relationship between the truth and a lie." That certainly applies to these schmoes.
posted by , at
6/27/2006 1:09 PM
Again, off topic. Rush is such a total weenie that presumably he'll slide by claiming the Viagra was necessary to preserve his life.
Here's hoping he OD's and has to have his gangrenous dork chopped off in the ER.
posted by , at
6/27/2006 2:06 PM
He undoubtedly has nasty fromunda cheese. Sporco e rivoltarsi!
posted by , at
6/27/2006 4:15 PM
i have a question. does pflag or any other national organization go into public schools? i really don't know.
posted by , at
6/27/2006 10:06 PM
PFLAG per se does not "go into" schools, unless asked. It does have an education project, and is very concerned with bullying and other issues related to GLBT kids, but it does not have any kind of an "official" role in the curriculum, at least so far as I know (and I am a leader). From time to time we are asked to provide a speaker for a GSA, or to contribute to a "diversity day" project, or something like that, but it varies widely depending on the specific state and town and school.
A group that is very concerned with this particular issue is GLSEN, the Gay/Lesbian/Straight Education Network. They provide resources and support for people who want to start GSA's, sponsor the Day of Silence, and other educational functions, especially in the high schools.
HTH,
Jane in CT
posted by , at
6/28/2006 12:38 PM
if the noble goal of education is the three r's then the school board/district or whoever should never have introduced social issues into the curriculum. but they did and that's fine because social studies is a part of education. and this parent has a right to disagree with that curriculum. he also has a right as a taxpayer to exculde his child from this curriculum. he also has a right to send his child to another school. and he has a right to protest. just as gay parents have been doing when they are denied their perspective in public schools.
posted by , at
6/28/2006 1:17 PM
if the noble goal of education is the three r's then the school board/district or whoever should never have introduced social issues into the curriculum. but they did and that's fine because social studies is a part of education. and this parent has a right to disagree with that curriculum. he also has a right as a taxpayer to exculde his child from this curriculum. he also has a right to send his child to another school. and he has a right to protest. just as gay parents have been doing when they are denied their perspective in public schools.
posted by , at
6/28/2006 1:17 PM
if the noble goal of education is the three r's then the school board/district or whoever should never have introduced social issues into the curriculum. but they did and that's fine because social studies is a part of education. and this parent has a right to disagree with that curriculum. he also has a right as a taxpayer to exculde his child from this curriculum. he also has a right to send his child to another school. and he has a right to protest. just as gay parents have been doing when they are denied their perspective in public schools.
posted by , at
6/28/2006 1:17 PM
"...this parent has a right to disagree with that curriculum. he also has a right as a taxpayer to exculde his child from this curriculum. he also has a right to send his child to another school. and he has a right to protest...."
All of which is beside the point. No one denies his right to do any or all of these things. What raises people's ire (mine included) is when someone like this lends himself to defamatory propaganda. The 'mob attack' on this gentleman's son turns out to be a complete fabrication. I do not know if he is the source of this falsehood, or if the various anti-gay cuckoos he's latched on to are. If he is, then he is lying, plain and simple. If they are, then he is a party to the lies of others. What a fine example to set for his son!
I guess simple honesty and decency are beyond our Christian crusaders. Sheesh! They and George W. Bush are doing more to discredit Christianity than any religious skeptic ever could.
posted by , at
6/28/2006 2:25 PM
well, i don't know. i read the statment by the school board. it is still not clear either way. and i think the parent did call the newspaper. who else would know to do so. that in itself is antagonizing.
posted by , at
6/28/2006 2:51 PM
no, it is not a cop out. i have been "criticized" for being ex-gay and christian. i can see children picking on a nother kid for what his parents believe.
also, if gay parents are allowed to represent themselves then so should christian parents. folks - you can't say you can speak and then say christians can't.
posted by , at
6/29/2006 1:12 PM
i may not agree with the attitude of christians who don't want their children to accept homosexuality as part of this world, but it would be folly to not accept christian zealots as part of this world also. i may not like how they think of gays (and even those of us who are ex-gay - because believe me there is enough snickering from them as well as from gays) but i do know they are a part of this world.
posted by , at
6/29/2006 1:21 PM
I personally chose not to bring my kids to the easter egg roll at the white house this easter. It is nothing against the gay parents who did. I just chose not to subject my kids to activism as my parents did me. Obviously, Parkers hatred of gay men and women outweigh his love for his child. Sad and frightening. Hopefully his child will grow up with an opened mind.
posted by jekelhyde, at
6/29/2006 10:46 PM
And another thing: perhaps you didn't mean it as such, but many gay people are also christian or otherwise spiritual and I personally resent the statement, If gay people can, than christians can too, to paraphrase. These Christians are not speaking for all of us. And I can debate the bible with any so called Christian who wants to do so. Many, many gay Christians are sick of being sent down to the basement.
posted by jekelhyde, at
6/29/2006 10:52 PM
many christians who do not believe in homosexuality are also not out condemning those who are. you only see what the media portrays or what the christian activists portray. in my world, you can be gay, you can be christian and gay, you can be christian and not gay, you can be christian and have no opinion, you can be just who you are. there is too much emphasis by one group being put on another group to change. who cares? live as you want - others do the same and everyone back to your corners.
posted by , at
7/01/2006 2:42 PM
Actually, I see what's in my face. My father is a minister at a local church. A Sunday School teacher told my daughter that I was going to hell because of my relationship. My dad fired her, but that is beside the point. Fundamentalist Christian groups have been spouting for years that Gay and Christian are two words that can't be used together. Someone in an earlier post stated that "if gay parents are allowed to represent themselves, than Christian parents should also." This is where I take offense. I am a gay christian parent and I am not alone. Gay is not anti-Christian, but more and more "Christian" is anti-gay.
posted by jekelhyde, at
7/04/2006 12:22 AM
These people really believe they can make Homosexuals Heterosexuals?, of course they don't believe that, it's something they want ignorant people to believe. BUT people aren't buying into that as much any more because so many of these people are having children BORN gay and so many more are seeing the Religous Right Groups for what they are LIARS, manipulators Idolitors and Biblidolitars.
My God can you imagine a world full of Heterosexuals? NO WAY!! Can you imagine a world full of Religious Right thinking people? MY God NO WAY!! AND speaking of My God, look at what HE's doing to the religioious organizations who think they know more than HE does!!
They are starting to crumble and fall and split!
Oh and btw, how about kissing a frog and making it turn into a Prince or Princess, do you think they think that is possible too?
When will these people stop their lying, bigotry, homophobia hypocricy and worse of all their blasphemy!!!
Here's just another story of their deceit.
Dominick
posted by , at
7/04/2006 4:23 PM
I'm disturbed by the characterization of David Parker's act as a "publicity" stunt in the original column. It was an act of civil disobedience, carried out a few miles from where Thoreau was arrested and jailed for not paying a poll tax. Thoreau wrote "Civil Disobedience" about the act. It inspired Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr. and, probably, David Parker, although David Parker might not know it. Like Wayne Besen, I object to the publicity given to the schoolyard fight by Mass Resistance's web site. But I don't agree with Mr. Besen's demonification of David Parker.
Tom
posted by , at
7/06/2006 5:45 PM
Thanks Tom: (It was civil disobedience)-about the schoolyard incident:
Some have entirely missed the essence of our concerns. Perhaps, this is my fault to some degree. At least three children that the school claims did not "participate" at all (there is strong dispute here), but were in the “observing” crowd, have previously said things to my son to bring him to tears. My wife and I are well aware of what their parents have written and said publicly. It is clear from what these children said to my son, they have been influenced by adults that stand against our views.
David Parker
posted by David Parker, at
7/09/2006 11:51 AM
I wrote a reply to your blog. Where is it? Don't I get to reply to the comments?
David Parker
posted by David Parker, at
7/09/2006 7:02 PM
Wayne,
You still have not addressed my comments. Is this your "mass deception?"
David Parker
posted by David Parker, at
7/09/2006 7:05 PM
The simple answer is, NO. The "Good Christians" of "that time" were fighting for black freedom. The "good Christians" of that time died by the thousands for freedom. The conduct of "gay sex" is not the same as race. Sodomy is not equatable to the dignity of being born "black". I will share a real truth with you; In Lexington Mass.---I am the new annointed "Black Man"--I am Damn proud of it. David Parker
posted by David Parker, at
7/11/2006 8:03 PM
<< Home
