Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer is loudly pressuring President Obama to ratify the United Nations Treaty on the Rights of Children. In fairness, during the campaign Obama stated that he thought it was disgraceful that the US had not ratified it already, and Hillary Clinton also lauded the treaty.
So what is this treaty? It turns over the parenting of your children to a committee in Geneva, Switzerland. Here are some of the tenants this gaggle of experts has come up with to improve on your childrearing methods:
This group has decided that every child must:
Be registered at birth so the State can keep track of them.
Have mandated federally-funded health insurance.
Be protected by law from spanking in any form.
Be guaranteed the freedom of expression (read that watch as much television, listen to whatever music, or even view pornography).
Be guaranteed freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (you cannot insist they go to church or keep them from going to some cult).
Be guaranteed the right to privacy (do whatever they want in their room and parental abortion notification laws will be abolished).
Be guaranteed the right to education (read that public school education).
Be guaranteed the right to freely participate in cultural life and arts (to include the Gay Pride Parade in Barbara’s home state of CA?).
The proponents of this invasion into the rights of parents and families say that this group in Switzerland is not an enforcement body but is just making suggestions. In case Barbara and her friends have forgotten, let me remind them that we are governed by our own constitution, and according to the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the U.S. Constitution a treaty directly applies to all citizens in the United States. Article VI, Section 2 states: All treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution of the laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
Crossing your fingers behind your back as you sign this treaty will not negate it. Do you think for one second that the legendarily liberal 9th Circuit Appeals Court in Barbara’s home state of California will ignore the opportunities this treaty would give them to reengineer our families? Their track record would not indicate so.
Wake up America! Your children are about to be kidnapped while you are sleeping. Arm yourselves with knowledge and join the battle to save your children from those who would take away your rights to raise them. It is time to take up your “pen,” i.e. keyboard, and shoot an email off to your congressman, your president, and yes, even Barbara Boxer to let them know we are not going to give up our children to some group of so- called experts set up by the United Nations.
Principle Based Evaluation: Since strong communities are the key to a strong nation because transformation comes from the bottom up and inside out, then families must be the core building block of society not global organizations.
For more information on the author, Gary Cake, go to: http://www.mtwm.org/
James Morey
said:
 |
“UN”wanted Interference This treaty (the UN “Convention on the Rights of the Child”) is another example, along with certain trade agreements, of the US handing over its national sovereignty to the UN. Considering the UN’s rather mixed success (and I am being generous is using the word “mixed”) in managing the world, we should definitely be opposed to any such treaties. The UN also is not our duly-elected representative government whom we can vote out of office, or whom we can over-turn using the Proposition system. The UN is a remote, independent body of leaders who are not beholden to our national sovereignty. In fact, they seem to wish to dissolve the idea of national sovereignty altogether and replace it with global sovereignty, which, conveniently, they will own. And as Gary points out, while many of the points of the treaty sound good and wonderful, the precise definition of these rights and “freedoms” is not under US control but that of the UN. And so far, the UN has not had good success preserving freedom using their definitions. And in the hands of the liberal elite these agreement, which as Gary pointed out are legally binding, could spell disaster for our nation as we know it. But the real key here is that the changes that the UN is supposedly seeking cannot be mandated from a globally-centralized government, but can only be properly enacted locally, starting with our families, our immediate communities and reform in local laws and government. But really, the changes must begin with us, in self-government. The real change agent is not the UN or even the US, it’s the ME. The full text of the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” can be found at http://www.hrweb.org/legal/child.html . |
Jessica Rankin
said:
 |
... This treaty frustrates me very much. There is absolutely no reason for the UN to make laws that our parents/children have to abide by! While there are some points that seem okay (and others that are ridiculous), the treaty is the UN's, so our families would be subject to laws from another country. What is this saying about the laws that the US makes? Are we not smart enough to make our own laws? By doing this, the US would be handing our power over to the UN. We'd be stepping onto a very slippery slope if we signed this treaty. If they can make one of our laws, then what's going to stop them from making more and eventually all of our laws? Also, some of the points of the treaty are ridiculous. "Be protected by law from spanking in any form." "Be guaranteed the right to privacy (do whatever they want in their room and parental abortion notification laws will be abolished)." As a teenager, I completely disagree with these points. There might as well not be any relationship between parents and their kids with these sorts of laws. It's advocating teen independence from their family. A parent is one who is supposed to discipline, teach, nurture, love and impart wisdom to their children. They're supposed to be a vital part of a child's life. Like Gary stated, this treaty would take away the parents ability to raise their children all around. It makes me feel very uneasy that our President is pushing to ratify such a treaty as this and I hope that enough people will oppose it to keep the US from going through with it. |
Nathan Whelham
said:
 |
question I read through the The full text of the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” at http://www.hrweb.org/legal/child.html and did not find the statements (posted below) that you included in your article. Be protected by law from spanking in any form. Be guaranteed the freedom of [removed]read that watch as much television, listen to whatever music, or even view pornography). Be guaranteed freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (you cannot insist they go to church or keep them from going to some cult). Be guaranteed the right to privacy (do whatever they want in their room and parental abortion notification laws will be abolished). Be guaranteed the right to education (read that public school education). Could you direct me to where you got this information or what part of the Convention you are refering to? Thanks, Nathan |
