Posted on 09/20/2005 12:20:00 PM PDT by Lindykim
Dah it is called an editorial not a report, let me see if I can excplain the diffeerence to you.
A report is suppose to be a factual unbiased report on a story.
An editorial, on the other hand, is a story with an editors spin or emotions tied into it.
What Linda did is an Editorial.
And you Alter Kater are either not reading, not understanding or simply out to insult and agitate. None of which are particularly good traits.
Thought you'd be interested in this.
Sorry, but not so. I googled him in and found other stories which added the part about him refusing to leave and challenging the school. My sense is he wanted to get arrested, which is fine, but probably not the way to go with issues like this.
And I don't disagree with his goals, but he apparently got what he sought, publicity through an arrest. The left does it all the time.
Really? Thanks for clearing that one up, Aristotle. Calling people "Communists," "Fascists," or "Nazis" is simply not an effective debating point. It makes you sound shrill and silly, and justs draws attention to itself. Grow up.
What Linda did is an Editorial.
Yes. One in which she (1) fails to adequately let us know what exactly it is she's commenting on, (2) one in which she comes across as unreliable, uninformative and potentially unsound.
Attempting? They already have the children 10 hours/day. Universal compulsory schooling was a socialist (Prussian) institution from its inception.
Parents are a child's primary educators, not schools. The State can only justly overide natural parental rights if the parents are grossly neglecting their parental duties.
Linda get's over 800 individual unique hits a week on Christian-news-in-maine.com alone. So, where are you published again?
Jake
How does that concept fit in with the discussion and my comment?
The article still stinks. A newspaper with a circulation of 800 would be a joke --- maybe the problem is your lack of editorial standards. Actual standards might result in a appreciable audience.
I'm published in at least as many places as this Linda fellow. Vanity websites are not publishing houses, a whopping 800 hits to the contrary notwithstanding.
What your brain refuses to recognize, Macv, is that there is no politely reasonable way to deal with people who are determined to use the power of the state to indoctrinate your children. You have to confront them head on because they just keep pushing and pushing and pushing.
Cultural left activists have been steadily infiltrating school boards. The only way to stop these people is to fight back loudly and publicly.
I agree. And at the same time pulling one's own kids out of the meat grinder. If humanly possible.
I've often wondered why those on both the extremes resort to personal attacks when they suspect anyone disagrees with them.
You have to confront them head on because they just keep pushing and pushing and pushing.
You will not find any post of mine that disagrees with the motives of Parker. But a reading the first paragraph of the original post clearly paints a picture that did not exist. I merely stated that his actions were essentially no different from those used by activists on the left. He was trying to get publicity by getting arrested, plain and simple. I do not know how much effort he made trying to get the school board to notify him when objectionable (to him) subjects were being taught, or whether he has considered other options such as private schools or home schooling.
My brain may not recognize everything, sir, but it does recognize duplicity whether on the left or the right.
You can only fight activist tactics by using them yourself. Tell me, what exactly is wrong about using mobilization ? It works. Do you think politics is a tea party ? What is wrong about loudly calling attention to injustice to force a confrontation ? What is wrong about being willing to go to jail to call attention to injustice ? What is wrong about being a martyr for the faith ? His actions were heroic and commendable.
You can only fight confrontation with confrontation of your own. If you try to be politely reasonable and diplomatic with these people you will be walked over ever time. Obviously Parker is dealing with a school board controlled by sodomite activists and sympathizers. Home schooling is to essentially run and concede his tax dollars and the public sphere to them. Your Caspar Milquetoast whine about "getting the school board (i.e. gay activists) to notify him" is ridiculous.
This is war. Our enemies are not politely reasonable. Neither should we be.
And by the way, what exactly is "extreme" about directly fighting and confronting militant deviance ?
I'm not saying you have to follow Marquess of Queensbury rules whenever you confront liberals, I'm saying yelling "Bolshevik" only makes you look like a nut.
Heck, both you and Mr. Parker can launch all the revolutions you want. You can use any tactic you want. My point is simply that the article posted didn't say any of the things you are saying. It was duplicitous. It simply made Parker sound like any reasonable citizen walking into school and requesting something, only to be attacked by the police, loosed by a ravenous Bolshevik school board:
His heinous crime? Parker is guilty of being a morally principled man with the courage to request that he and his wife be given advance notification when issues of sexual unnaturalness and perversion (transgenderism, sodomy, and same-sex headed relationships) were going to be discussed in his son's classroom
This is why you some times have to look to the hated MSM to at least get the story of what really happened.
Once again, you fail to see the point.
Parker was a reasonable man who made a reasonable request, one which the school board had no intention of complying with. He asked them to respect his right to teach his children Bible values and not try to indoctrinate them with sodomite values. He wasn't asking them to teach his children Bible values. Just not to actively undermine them.
He confronted the hidden agenda of the school board which was to undermine Bible values wherever and whenever possible. He had made a request which they had no intention of complying with. Direct confrontation is a wonderful way of exposing the hidden, conspiratorial agendas of cultural leftists who hate Christianity.
No, I've already seen enough from your posts alone to know he was anything but a reasonable man. I've not seen anything of his actual written or oral requests to the school board, nor as I mentioned earlier, have I seen anything resembling a desire on his part for another solution. As you have pointed out repeatedly, he wanted a confrontation, and that's what he got.
I wonder if he had the best interests of his child in mind, or was simply reinforcing his own religious biases and agenda? My point though continues to be that the article simply did not tell the truth about his motivations or actions, not to assign judgment as the right or wrong about him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.