7-Year Old Beaten At School For Father's Pro-Family Stance

GotZoom

Senior Member
Apr 20, 2005
5,719
368
48
Cordova, TN
Where there is no direct blame to the parents, I think we all agree with Mr. Parker's assessment as to why the children did this.

-------

LEXINGTON, Massachusetts, June 14, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - On May 17—the two-year anniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts—the first-grade son of a prominent pro-family advocate was dragged and beaten behind the Estabrook Elementary School in Lexington during recess, receiving multiple blows to the chest, stomach, and genital area.

Jacob Parker, the 7-year-old who was attacked, is the son of David Parker. LifeSiteNews.com readers will recall that David Parker objected to homosexual curriculum in his son's kindergarten class. At a meeting with the principal of the school last year Parker requested that the school inform him of when homosexual discussions would take place, so he could exclude his son from the activity. The principal refused and Parker said he would not leave until his request was granted. School administration called the police and had Parker charged with trespassing.

Brian Camenker the President of MassResistance, a pro-family group, that has worked with Parker to have the rights of parents in Massachusetts respected told LifeSitenews.com that the school system has since continued to refuse to notify parents of such material being presented in class. On April 27, 2006, Parker, his wife, and another family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the school system.

LifeSiteNews.com spoke with Mr. Parker about the incident. According to Mr. Parker, school authorities determined from an investigation into the assault that the beating was indeed planned and premeditated.

Mr. Parker described the incident at the school saying: "During the recess period, a group of 8-10 kids suddenly surrounded Jacob and grabbed him. He was taken around the corner of the school building out of sight of the patrolling aides, with the taunting and encouragement of other kids. Jacob was then positioned against the wall for what appeared to be a well planned and coordinated assault.”

Parker told LifeSiteNews.com, his son related that one student in particular performed the actual physical assault while, “many children stood, watched silently, and did nothing as the beating commenced.”

Parker added: "The group of kids surrounded Jacob and he was beaten and punched. Then, as he fell to the ground, another child was heard saying to the group of children, 'Now you all can finish him off,' and as he was down on his hands and knees, the beating continued on his back. Then, fortunately, one little girl ran to contact the oblivious playground aides to stop it.

"Four of the attackers were from Jacob's first-grade class; the others were from other classes at Estabrook.

"The teachers' aide apparently determined that since she could not see external bleeding, and since Jacob apparently was not hit in the face, she did not send him to she school nurse."

The family was immediately notified of the incident.

Speaking to LifeSiteNews.com, Parker speculated that the cause of the attack was most likely what he called “displaced aggression.” “If children hear venomous things from their parents, the children do internalize this,” he said.

“I certainly don’t want to vilify the children in this,” he said. “We understand that skirmishes happen on the playground. It’s taking the child around out of view of the aides, and the number of children that stood around watching that concerns us.”


Parker noted that his conflict with the school over homosexuality is well known among the students. "We are aware that the school administration sent notices home with all the young children concerning the Parker arrest, the 'King and King' incident and the federal lawsuit," he said. “They must know that the children read them.”

He pointed out that the date of the attack--the two year aniversary of same-sex "marriage" in Massachusetts--cannot be a coincidence.

Families attend an anti-David Parker demonstration.The topic of Parker's beliefs has become so widespread among the students that Jacob says he overheard his fellow classmates ruminating that perhaps their current principle—who has resigned her position to take up a job elsewhere—was leaving the job because of Jacob’s father. Members of the community itself have organized public demonstrations specifically against Parker, in which their children have taken part. One of these demonstrations is pictured on the right and below. (photos courtesy of MassResistance.com) While prominently displayed in the student library are the back issues of the Lexington Minuteman that specifically deal with Parker’s case, for the children to read.

“We’re trying to be patient and tolerant," said Parker when asked if he was considering pulling his son out of the school. "We’re trying to hang on to the notion that the schools are for every child and for everyone. I don’t feel that we should have to leave for an injustice.”

But he added that “There are limits to how much patience we can have. I certainly understand why more and more parents are pulling their children out of public schools.”

Ironically, the school prides itself on its long-time involvement in various "Safe School" programs, which are geared to creating school environments "safe" for students who are homosexual.

Parker asked, "Isn't the school supposed to be addressing safety and preventing bullying and violence? Or are such programs only focused on children with homosexual parents? You can be certain that if this happened to a child with homosexual parents more would be made of this and that 'lessons' teaching tolerance and diversity of homosexual behavior normalization would be forced upon the young children."

The school and larger community are deeply divided over the Parker's stand against pro-homosexual indoctrination. A group has been formed in Lexington to counter Parker's efforts. The 'Lexington Cares' group maintains an anti-Parker website and has conducted anti-Parker letter writing campaigns and demonstrations.

Calls to Estabrook school were not returned by press time.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06061410.html

-----

If a child can be expelled for a school year for bringing an aspirin or a plasic knife for lunch to school, I would certainly expect these children, who participated in this premeditated attack, receive the same punishment, if not worse; i.e. arrested for assault, etc.

What do you want to bet nothing will happen to them?
 
It wont be too much longer - maybe the next generation? where Christians are once again saught out and slaughtered for their faith.
 
GotZoom said:
Where there is no direct blame to the parents, I think we all agree with Mr. Parker's assessment as to why the children did this.

-------

....
I don't really agree..I see a story of a school yard bullying. Why? don't know, but in first grade I'm not willing to tag it to an adults actions that kids could give a shit about.

All speculation on Parkers part, IMO.
 
Mr. P said:
I don't really agree..I see a story of a school yard bullying. Why? don't know, but in first grade I'm not willing to tag it to an adults actions that kids could give a shit about.

All speculation on Parkers part, IMO.

Walks like a duck..talks like a duck.

No such thing as a coincidence. I think one of the kids heard their parents (parent) talking and took it upon him/herself to act.
 
GotZoom said:
Walks like a duck..talks like a duck.

No such thing as a coincidence. I think one of the kids heard their parents (parent) talking and took it upon him/herself to act.
Maybe...but I doubt it. And nothing I saw in the article connected the issue to the event. Date? coincidence. Or do you think parents told their kid, "Tommarrow you beat-up the Parker kid"?

I think Mr. Parker is trying to make something outta this that just ain't there, just my opinion. But you must admit it fits well into his cause. Hell, maybe he arranged it.:p:
 
Mr. P said:
Maybe...but I doubt it. And nothing I saw in the article connected the issue to the event. Date? coincidence. Or do you think parents told their kid, "Tommarrow you beat-up the Parker kid"?

I think Mr. Parker is trying to make something outta this that just ain't there, just my opinion. But you must admit it fits well into his cause. Hell, maybe he arranged it.:p:

I don't think the parents called it "Beat up the Parker-kid day." But I do think there may have been conversation about the two-year anniversary, etc. 7-year olds aren't that stupid.

I don't think these kids waiting around for 3 or 4 days though...they couldn't have kept the secret. One kid heard something the day before, went to school, rounded up the kids and said "Come on."
 
All bullying sucks. And that no kid stood up for the Parker kid sucks too.

But, has anyone ever thought that maybe this kid is just as big a jerk as his dad and that Parker's dad's criminal actions against the school are completely unrelated? Apples don't fall far from their respective trees.
 
jasendorf said:
All bullying sucks. And that no kid stood up for the Parker kid sucks too.

But, has anyone ever thought that maybe this kid is just as big a jerk as his dad and that Parker's dad's criminal actions against the school are completely unrelated? Apples don't fall far from their respective trees.

Leave it to you.

Geez.

Dad wants to be notified when they are teaching his 7-year old kindergartener about homosexuality and you call him a jerk.

Wait until your 10-month old son starts going to school.
 
First off, this is a cleary biased source of this story. Second, it sounds more like this kid is a victim of simply bullying. Most first-graders don't understand the debate about homosexuality. I'm sorry the kid got beat up, and the school should do something about it, but to try to politicize this is ridiculous.

acludem
 
While Parker makes a couple good points, especially regarding what would have happened had his son had homosexual parents, all in all he sounds like he's gone a bit over the top with his anti-homosexual zealousness. To me, this seems kind of like a time and place issue, and Parker should have thought about the implications on his son socially for making such a big stink. It happens with ANY parent who makes a big scene at a school, the kid always gets ostricized and bullied. Parker's motivations appear to reach beyond simply wanting his child to not be taught homosexual lessons.

I'm with Mr. P in saying that the beating on the anniversary is coincidence.

I'm split on deciding where Parker is on the line of standing up for your beliefs and being blinded so much as to place your own child in harm's way.

And just to be clear, the fact that the issue at hand is homosexuality matters not to me. I'm questioning Parker's tactics, not his issues.
 
there is good logic...it is the dad's fault that his kid got beat up and if not the kid is probably as big a jerk as his dad so he desreved it ....

yes let us please condone the lord of the flies mentility of these children god forbid the mob be held accountable for beating a child ....
 
manu1959 said:
there is good logic...it is the dad's fault that his kid got beat up and if not the kid is probably as big a jerk as his dad so he desreved it ....

yes let us please condone the lord of the flies mentility of these children god forbid the mob be held accountable for beating a child ....
Naw.. fuck the mob. I can think up all sorts of fun punishments to bestow on them. Too bad I wouldn't be allowed to actually implement them :(

There's no way you should be punished for your fathers actions. My point was that just because you shouldn't doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Cuz it does. All the time, and Parker should've thought about that when he was making his battle plan.
 
jasendorf said:
All bullying sucks. And that no kid stood up for the Parker kid sucks too.

But, has anyone ever thought that maybe this kid is just as big a jerk as his dad and that Parker's dad's criminal actions against the school are completely unrelated? Apples don't fall far from their respective trees.
Yeah, I did..
 
Homosexual discussions in a Kindegarten class. Heh. I guess the slippery slope isn't a fallacy anymore. I think even mentioning homosexuality (or just sex) would probably get you a paddling when I was a kid, and I'm only 31. Johnny may not be able to read by the time he's 18, but boy he can sure can suck the chrome off a trailer hitch!

This is just another example of why government funding of schools must die. People who love our present system just want a means to indoctrinate kids with PC attitudes. They won't admit it unless you really press them, of course. At the very least, the state of Massachussets should cut this guy's taxes by an amount equal to whatever his son's education costs the state, and let him school him however he sees fit.
 
dmp said:
It wont be too much longer - maybe the next generation? where Christians are once again saught out and slaughtered for their faith.

Nah, there will be a new "awakening" before that happens. There have been three. After the Revolutionary War there was a religious awakening in the nation, after the Civil War and after WWII. Hopefully it won't take a war this time to get that ball moving.
 
Mr.Conley said:
I'm with Mr. P on this, I don't think 1st graders are going to beat up a kid because of what his dad said. Their too young.

I think they will if their parents "suggest" it in just the right way. Long ago this type of thing happened to black children because of their pigmentation. It wasn't because the kids thought it up, it was what their parents indoctrinated into them.
 
jasendorf said:
All bullying sucks. And that no kid stood up for the Parker kid sucks too.

But, has anyone ever thought that maybe this kid is just as big a jerk as his dad and that Parker's dad's criminal actions against the school are completely unrelated? Apples don't fall far from their respective trees.

Damn.

For a split second, I was considering giving you positive rep. Then I finished reading the post.
 

Forum List

Back
Top