If some weak dude with a faint voice and shifty eyes creeped up to your six-year-old in the mall and attempted to discuss sex, he'd likely get arrested. If that dude got a job in the schools and attempted to discuss sex with a bunch of six-year-olds, the police would balk at arresting him. In fact, if you complained loud enough they might arrest you. That's what happened to David Parker, a parent in Lexington, Massachusetts who requested that teachers exclude his son from classroom discussions of homosexuality. As Michelle Malkin points out, some kids that age can't even tie their own shoes. Are they really ready for a classroom discussion of homosexuality? Upset over his son bringing home the book, Who's in a Family?, which features gay parents, Parker complained to the superintendent of schools, who balked at his request to excuse his son from first-grade discussions of homosexuality. Parker apparently refused to take no for an answer--it's his kid and his taxdollars, after all--and the superintendent called the police, who took the parent away in handcuffs.

He was actually charged with tresspass after being asked to leave. So he was actually arrested for the right thing.

Although I agree with your sentiment.

Of course, the upside is, that now that he has been arrested a lot of people are aware of what is going on. Good on him, for sticking to his guns and forcing the thought police to have him arrested, thus getting much attention for his plight.

Jason

Mr. Parker is bravely defending all of us, even though his methods are not the most effective. I hope he makes life miserable for the school board over their sexual indoctrination efforts.

Does anyone feel that today's low educational standards, which have slipped pretty steadily since the 1950s, are unrelated to the effort in schools, particularly public, to educate children in extra-academic areas. These areas (the environment, various ethnic/gender months, personal sexuality/hygiene, etc.) are best left to family. Best for school, student, and family. No?

As someone who works in the latte liberal town of Lexington, MA, I'm not surprised at this. This is the same town where a few years ago, a dubious First Amendment lawsuit forced removal of a creche from the town green. What was once the birthplace of the revolution is now a PC enclave for upperclasss Massachusetts liberals. I guess this sort of thing is business as usual here in the Gay State(the Spirit of America!).

These attempts to indoctrinate public school children under the guise of diversity is a particularly insidious aspect of the gay agenda. The clear intent of exposing kids to this book is to show them the "right" way to think about same sex couples. It's obviously patently absurd to think that six year olds can think critically on this subject--many adults can't. The intent here appears to be to get to kids at a young enough age that they won't be able to think critically about this issue as adults. If this means circumventing the legitimiate right of parent taxpayers to control what their children are tought on this fundamental issue, so be it.

Luckily, there are people like this guy out there with enough guts to put themselves on the line to expose these outrages.

Perhaps the creche wouldn't have been so offensive to the people of Lexington if it featured a same sex couple.

If it had featured a same sex couple it would have been considered protected free speech wouldn't it? If you have the means home school, the only way to beat the system is to opt out of it.

Didn't Hillary say "It takes a village"? Looks like the Village People to me.

I cannot say I'm surprised by this story, however, it will probably end up with "gay households" being the sticking point rather than the real issue to me as a mother--parents asking a school to do something and being ignored.

Had Parker's son been allergic to peanuts, they'd have fallen all over themselves to be sure he didn't come in contact with so much as a Snickers bar all year. But, let it be something of philosophical importance that isn't PC enough to make them seem "diversified" or "tolerant" and they cannot WAIT to file the request in the recycling bin.

Disgusting.

This is an important news item and I'm glad it's highlighted on this blog.

As the links indicate, the father was not belligerent. And the "textbook" ridiculously employs anologies to the animal kingdom in trying to assure kids it's "ok" to have a variety of non-traditional families, including gay and lesbian ones. (Does that then mean it's ok to beat male rivals to death to win a female mate?)

I agree that 6-year olds are probably too young to weigh the relative merits of heterosexual and homosexual parenting and marriage. Still, I do think it's appropriate to include it in a middle or high school environment. If anyone wants to light into this opinion, flame away....

It would also be interesting to know whether the instructor willfully defied school, district or state cirricula, to know whether he or she were trying to make this "a test case" - in terms of a legalistic or activist agenda.

The comment feature forced me to choose an erroneous spelling, "anologies" because it screened the "an[a]l" within "an[a]logies" as indecent. Of all places to (mis)identify something not necessarily appropriate for all readers. LOL!

Meanwhile, here in Maine a case where a teacher had inappropriate sexual contact with a student went unreported in the media for four months after the teacher had been placed on paid vacation - http://www.wmtw.com/news/4426796/detail.html - and ain't she cunnin', too? Question: Was she protected from bad press because she was a public school teacher, or becasue she was a lesbian?

Don't be so mean-spirited, they only licked ears.

This is exactly the kind of crap that passes for public education these days. The government schools have been taken over by the politically correct leftist agenda mongers and the taxpayers are forced to support their tripe and accept what they are pushing on our kids.

It’s outrageous that a concerned parent who prefers, for WHATEVER reasons, that his kid is not subject to ideas that have no place in the daily curriculum of teaching the three “R’s” is the villain here.

Even more outrageous is that the school system is allowed to indoctrinate kids at such an early age with concepts that they wouldn’t have a chance of understanding even if they had a clue of what they were.

The public schools are setting our kids up. Can you say: Brainwashing?

The really frustrating part is that lower and middle income families have little option. If they decide to pull their children out of public schools they are still required to fund those schools from their tax dollars. Therefore, they are forced to pay for their child's education twice. Most families these days include two working spouses just to make ends meet which rules out homeschooling. Private schools, although much more efficient financially than public schools, still must be paid for...even though the parents are required to continue to pay for the public education that their child is not receiving.

One question: How can someone be charged with "tresspass" for being in a public place? If he followed the rules for entry (went to the office and checked in, etc) wasn't breaking any law or being belligerant, then his only offense was to have the audacity to refuse to leave a place that he helps finance when his employee (the priniciple...who is paid through tax dollars) ordered him to?

Whatever happened to people being paid with tax money being considered "public servants"? Are we now interlopers into the "public schools" that we finance and are entrusted with the care of our children? As John Stossel would say: "Give me a break!"

This is not the first incident involving parents concerned over what their child is learning in school. I read an article recently about parents who were allowed to remove their 3rd grade daughtor whenever the class watched sex videos. (not pornography but sex Ed.) This is almost identical to the Parkers' case, although involving an even younger child.

Our 7th grade speech and debate class is debating this issue, including David Parker's trespassing arrest.

GO RED SOX!
wow we lost two out of three to Seatle :o

This is an incredible story that will not go away. The town of Lexington is now proceding to prosecute David Parker, even though he was only trying to exercise his parental rights guaranteed to him under the "opt-out" law. Only in Massachusetts!

Regarding Curtis' question, the tresspass charge is trumped up. What they really want is full control over what can and can not be taught to 5-year-old kindergarten children.

I support David Parker. You can too. Visit http://www.davidparkerfund.org/