1. Mainstream media in four “gay marriage” states attacking latest pro-marriage ads featuring David & Tonia Parker — now flooding the airwaves.
Finally, the the pro-marriage movement has brought out the big guns. And the mainstream media is not pleased!
As the “gay marriage” elections approach in Minnesota, Washington, Maryland, and Maine, the mainstream media in those states has begun attacking the hard-hitting pro-family TV and radio ads just released, calling them “misleading” and “untruthful.”
(Of course, we have never seen any criticism or “fact-checking” of pro-gay marriage ads by the media.)
The ads feature powerful testimony David and Tonia Parker, parents from Lexington, Mass., who are warning citizens what “gay marriage” will lead to in the public schools. They Parkers discuss their own experiences in the local elementary school, originally reported by MassResistance starting in 2005, which ultimately led to a nationally reported federal civil rights lawsuit. We saw it all first-hand. We know that the ads are truthful.
The ads are being coordinated and largely paid for by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), and we’ve been told that “millions of dollars” are being spent for them in the four states in these last several days before the election.
Listen to Parker RADIO AD (in Washington) here.
The sudden appearance of these hard-hitting ads near the end of the campaign appears to have taken the homosexual lobby by surprise. After months of relatively low-conflict campaigning, NOM’s media guru Frank Schubert has suddenly released these these hard-hitting, emotional ads that go for the jugular: how the “gay marriage” agenda affects children. And they appear to be very effective.
The Left’s response appears to be collusion between the homosexual activist groups and the mainstream media in all of those states. They have simultaneously begun attacking the ads using supposed “facts” and outrageous lies and present their case.
The Parkers’ terrible saga with “gay” indoctrination
As MassResistance reported, in 2005 the local Lexington, Mass. elementary school began introducing homosexual “family” issues in the kindergarten where the Parkers’ 6-year-old son attended. The Parkers asked the school to follow the state’s parents’ rights law (re: human sexuality issues) and notify them when these issues would be brought up, and allow them to opt their son out. The school officials refused, and publicly announced that they would continue teaching these subjects to children despite the parents’ objections. After a second-grade teacher read the homosexual book King and King to kids, parents from that class, Robb & Robin Wirthlin, joined the Parkers’ objections. Finally, in 2007 the Parkers and the Wirthlins brought a federal civil rights case against the town.
The book King and King — about two princes who fall in love and marry each other — was read in class to second graders at David Parker’s school. Parents were not informed, and the school said they would continue to do it.
Shockingly, the federal judge in Boston ruled that because of “gay marriages” are performed in Massachusetts, schools had an obligation to equate homosexuality with regular marriage — and the parents had no rights to opt out or even be notified. The lawsuit made news across the county and even overseas.
MassResistance supported the Parkers from the beginning and exclusivelydocumented the entire saga.
Television ads with the Parkers were also aired in the California Prop 8 fight in 2008 and the Maine election in 2009. They were extremely effective in both situations.
The ads are pretty straightforward: They basically describe the Parkers’ experience in the schools and the federal judge’s ruling that cited “gay marriage,” and warn parents that it would likely happen to them.
Array of distortions and lies against Parkers
The articles and “fact-check” groups all seem to regurgitate the same misinformation about the Parkers and the school situation. It would take too long to refute everything point by point. But here are the general distortions and misinformation that the articles present:
- Isolated incident. Claim: This is just an isolated incident since the Parkers and Wirthlins are the only parents known to have complained or sued. Fact:This is widespread. Lots of parents complained informally. But most parents don’t have the resources to go to the lengths the Parkers and Wirthlins did. Further, parents now know that the courts have ruled against them.
- Not part of the curriculum. Claim: None of the “gay marriage” items were in any official curriculum. Fact: Whether it’s “official” curriculum or not is irrelevant. They were being routinely presented nevertheless, which the school admitted.
- Mass. parental notification law re: human sexuality issues. Claim: The school properly followed the Parental Notification Law because the Parkers were told that the “diversity book” (in the Parkers’ son’s kindergarten) would be given to kids. Fact: The Wirthlins, however, were not told beforehand that King & King would be read in the second-grade class. Furthermore, the law allows for opting out, which the school denied the parents. And the school said that it would not notify parents in the future.
- Not part of state Curriculum Frameworks. Claim: The 1999 Massachusetts Health Curriculum Frameworks includes gay marriage. And since this was implimented well before the 2003 “gay marriage” court ruling, the beginning of “gay marriage” here made no difference. Fact: The 1999 Frameworks do not specifically mention gay marriage, although they do mention “diverse families.” But more importantly, those frameworks have always been only recommendations, not mandatory. Schools widely took their own directions on “gay marriage” issues on their own.
- Diversity book given to kids. Claim: The original book given to the Parker’s son in Kindergarten, Who’s in a Family?, only talked about same-sex “families” and not “gay marriage.” Fact: This still brings that concept into the minds of young children. And other books (e.g., King & King) directly discussed “gay marriage.”
- Court ruling. Claim: The court did not rule that parents had no right to take their children out of class or to even be informed when this instruction was going to take place. Fact: That is a lie. The court certainly did rule that way.
- Not required reading. Claim: None of the books were required reading.Fact: It’s elementary school! Teachers reading the books to kids, or giving them to them, is essentially the same thing as being “required.”
- Trusting the teachers’ union. The “fact check” group in Rhode Island called the teachers’ union for the “facts” about gay marriage being taught! The teachers’ unions are completely biased on this issue. But they did not call MassResistance, which has documented an enormous amount of material.
- Rejection by the federal court. Claim: Since the federal court, appeals court, and US Supreme court all rejected the lawsuit, the Parkers’ claim has no relevance. Fact: The federal judge’s ruling that parents have no rights because of “gay marriage” has an extreme amount of relevance.
The barrage of media attacks on the Parkers
The articles attacking the ads and the Parkers all seem to repeat similar “fact check” information listed above.
Here’s just a sample of the articles that have appeared recently:
Minneapolis CBS TV News: “Reality Check: New, Deceptive Marriage Amendment Ad”
Minneapolis Star: “Marriage amendment: Ad links gay marriage, schools”
MinnPost (Minnesota): “Marriage ad unfairly links amendment to school curriculum issue”
Baltimore Sun: “Claims disputed in spot opposing same-sex marriage”
Baltimore Sun: “Debate over Question 6 focuses on ‘teaching’ gay marriage”
Maryland Metro Weekly: “Marriage-equality opponents, down in polls, employ shock tactics, misinformation campaign”
Maine Sunday Telegram: “TRUTH TEST: Schools would teach gay marriage? No”
Washington: Seattle Times: “Ad concerning schools teaching about gay marriage only half true”
How much actual “fact checking” did they do? David Parker told us that only one reporter, from the Associated Press, actually contacted him to ask for his side of the story. Parker said that although he talked with the AP reporter for over 30 minutes, the subsequent AP article included virtually nothing that Parker told them about his side of the story.
|Joining in the attack.Not to be left out, theBoston Globe published an editorial on Saturday attacking the ads and the Parkers, even though the ads are not being broadcast in Massachusetts.
Phony “fact-check” groups.
In some cases, the articles credited Internet fact-check groups for their information. Here are two of the so-called “fact-check” groups used by the media, which really just circulate the same misinformation and even call on pro-gay “authorities” for their facts on the Parker case. But they never contacted the Parkers themselves, or MassResistance.
PolitiFact, Rhode Island: “National Organization for Marriage says Massachusetts public schools teach kindergartners about gay marriage”
Washington Marriage Fact Check: “PMW’s New TV Ad, “Schools”
Obviously, the Parkers’ ad has hit a sharp nerve with the homosexual movement. The Parkers have told us that these sleazy attacks against them only harden their resolve to keep fighting.
2. Get the election lowdown with our MassResistance Voter Guide!
In case you haven’t seen it yet, check out our MassResistance Voter Guide2012 for Massachusetts. Get the REAL lowdown on the races affecting you! Includes: Congress, Legislature, Ballot Questions, Govorner’s Council.
Even if you don’t live in Massachusetts, you may find it interesting. We reveal just how beholden to the radical groups — pro-abortion, homosexual/transgender, socialist, etc. — our politicians here really are. And what starts in Massachusetts usually makes its way around the rest of the country before long!
3. Invest in the future: Help MassResistance reach our goal.
This important story of the Parkers in Massachusetts was only known because of MassResistance. We were there from the start, and catalogued all the twists and turns that followed. That’s just one example of the unmatched value of our frontline pro-family reporting.
Is our work important to you? Whatever happens in this election, the pro-family challenges coming up will be very difficult. Neither of the major parties has much interest in the “culture war” issues that we all see are changing society before us. It will take groups who are willing to fight hard and not compromise their principles.
Your financial investment in our efforts is very important. If you haven’t done so yet, or haven’t done so lately, please consider doing so now.
Help MassResistance continue to fight for you!
Help make our $100,000 fall fundraising campaign successful.
4. Unbelievable: Pro-life groups endorsing pro-choice, pro-homosexual politicians.
Last week the voters across Massachusetts received a mailing from theNational Right to Life Committee endorsing Scott Brown for US Senate. For weeks Massachusetts residents have been bombarded with TV ads like this one from Scott Brown telling everyone who will listen that he is “pro-choice.” He supports Roe v Wade. He supports funding for Planned Parenthood.
The group has admitted to the Boston Globe that they are aware of Brown’s pro-choice position. But he’s not as bad as his opponent, they said.
And it gets worse.
Yesterday Massachusetts Citizens for Life (MCFL) sent out an email blast announcing their endorsements of both Scott Brown for US Senate and Richard Tisei for Congress.
Like Brown, in almost every interview, Tisei is upfront about pro-choice position on abortion. Just last week, Tisei told the local Lynn Item, “I’m pro-choice. I have a 25-year record on women’s health that no one can argue with.”
But besides that, Tisei was a co-sponsor of the “buffer zone” bill around abortion clinics.
As we’ve documented, Tisei’s anti-family record is horrific. As an “open” homosexual, he has vowed to push “gay marriage” in Congress. Tisei brags that he was responsible for blocking the marriage amendment in the Massachusetts Legislature, denying people the right to vote on the issue. He co-sponsored the “transgender rights” bill. He supports funding the odious “Commission for GLBT Youth” that goes into public schools.
MCFL has claimed that NARAL and Planned Parenthood do not endorse Tisei “this year.” That may be true, but it’s very confusing given aggressive pro-choice record and public statements. Unfortunately, their list of endorsements from past years (which we used as basis for our voter guide) are no longer posted.
MCFL and similar groups, on the other hand, often dishonestly omit direct questions about a candidate’s pro-abortion positions on their voter guides and candidate questionnaires, confusing their readers. Instead they talk about “public funding,” “notification laws,” and individual bills, which at best only temporarily slow down the problem of abortion in America and at worst allow it to continue with government sanctions.
It’s one thing for individuals to quietly decide to vote for one candidate over another (although we are personally pretty strict about that regarding abortion).
But there is no excuse for a pro-life organization to formally endorse a pro-choice candidate. Period. By doing that, you guarantee that we will have more, not fewer, candidates for office who cave in to the pro-abortion lobby, because there is no price to be paid for it from our side.
These so-called “pro-life” groups can no longer be taken seriously. They are a disgrace to the hardworking people who struggle for the unborn.