Kindergarten Homosexual Indoctrination

  • Quote:
  • "Last April, as reported by LifeSiteNews.com, one parent of a six-year-old kindergartner, David Parker, was arrested, allegedly for “trespassing at his son'’s elementary school while attending a scheduled meeting with the principal and the city’s Director of Education. He had arranged a meeting to object to the homosexual curriculum materials and discussions his son was subjected to in his kindergarten class."
    Image hosted by Photobucket.com
  • Furthermore:

  • Parker has been banned from school grounds including being prohibited from picking up and dropping off his child for class!

    There are several important questions here:
    1) What rights are afforded parents of children in public schools?
    arranged a meeting to object to the homosexual curriculum materials and discussions his son was subjected to in his kindergarten class.
    2) Is Homosexuality a sex-related issue?
    The Superintendent(writes) differences in sexual orientation . . . do not trigger the notice and opt out provisions of Section 32A.” The opt-out provision, 32A, maintains that parents be notified if a school teach on human sexual issues.”
    3) Can the state detain a parent for attempting to enforce their parental rights?
    Parker was arrested for trespassing

    5) Is it CONSTITUTIONAL to violate Mr. Parker's right to
  • VOTE?

  • (As Mr. Parker is banned from ALL school grounds, which are his local polling place, the repercussions of the further violation of his Constitutional rights should thunder like an atomic blast throughout the country.)

    There is no indication in this story that Mr. Parker was anything other than peaceful in his attempt to get information regarding the teaching of homosexual acceptance. He was arrested for refusing to leave and held overnight.

    While some might say that being "against the teaching of acceptance" means I am a hate monger, that is the omission of truth and illogical. To clarify: I do not hate homosexuals but their activity is still wrong. However the material being taught to these kindergarteners says that it is ok to be homosexual. The nuance of dividing the person from the activity is better handled in the home rather than by public employees of unknown background or motive. What my objection, and I'm sure Mr. Parker would agree, is having an issue contrary to my religious beliefs taught to my children outside of my presence.

    Here are some excerpts from the material in question:
    "A family can be made up in many different ways" and includes this text:
    "Laura and Kyle live with their two moms, Joyce and Emily, and a poodle named Daisy. It takes all four of them to give Daisy her bath."
    Another illustrated page says:
    "Robin's family is made up of her dad, Clifford, her dad's partner, Henry, and Robin's cat, Sassy. Clifford and Henry take turns making dinner for their family."

    Telling a 6-year old it is ok then having them come home and the parent say it is not ok creates a conflict of authority between parent and state. That is unacceptable. The state does not have the right to usurp ANY parental authority when abuse and neglect are NOT present. This instance involving Mr. Parker clearly shows the state abusing its power in the influence of his household. In their defense, the Superintendent Paul B. Ash, Ph.D, has written that the State Dept. of Education has determined what constitutes a conflict of the statute regarding instruction of sex-related material.

    While some might be surprised that the processes have evolved to this point, I don't think ANYONE is surprised that this happened in Massachuetts (aka: The People's Republic of Mass.)

    To carry the argument one step further and address concerns about Christians being pro-active in government. This is the result of an anti-Christian government: a father is arrested for asserting his parental rights. A Christian based influence in government would not restrict rights as this lack of morality already has.