reply to post by WarminIndy
Now, therefore, Proclaims THIS DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD to the end that he may have a happy childhood and enjoy for his own good and for the good of society the rights and freedoms herein set forth, and calls upon parents, upon men and women as individuals, and upon voluntary organizations, local authorities and national Governments to recognize these rights and strive for their observance by legislative and other measures progressively taken in accordance with the following principles:
See that yellow bit? It calls for the child to HAVE A HAPPY CHILDHOOD. Being beaten by a Bible-thumping, cane-wielding, overpowering ADULT is not included in a Happy Childhood.
Same as EEO - the rights are there, WITHOUT REGARD to all those other things. Meaning, a child may be in a religious household (or poor, or brown/black/white, English-speaking or not, Dems or Repubs as parents, etc) and is STILL ENTITLED to a happy, safe childhood. The child's rights OVERRIDE the rights of the parents or other adults to wreck a childhood. PERIOD.
1:The child shall enjoy all the rights set forth in this Declaration. Every child, without any exception whatsoever, shall be entitled to these rights, without distinction or discrimination on account of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, whether of himself or of his family.
2: The child shall enjoy special protection, and shall be given opportunities and facilities, by law and by other means, to enable him to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity. In the enactment of laws for this purpose, the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration.
BY LAW, the best interests of the CHILD come FIRST - which does NOT include being beaten, shamed, psychologically and emotionally damaged - those are not Healthy and Normal things.
You found one word and took it out of context. (A familiar thing on this forum).
Read the SPIRIT of the law/rights - and it is dazzlingly obvious that being beaten, shamed, starved, etc. is CONTRARY to the Geneva Convention.
You are twisting it, just as windword pointed out.
edit on 10/2/13 by wildtimes because: formatting
calls upon parents, upon men and women as individuals, and upon voluntary organizations, local authorities and national Governments to recognize these rights and strive for their observance by legislative and other measures progressively taken
It's better to get your instruction directly from the Bible.
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
If an Evangelical tent preacher told his audience to stab the person to their right for JESUS! LAWD! The very vast majority of them would not do it.
Why would anyone buy a book like this. Those who bought this book are sick and have obvious issues.
It's never about what anyone directly says, it's what they say indirectly.
you seek out Christian threads or threads against Christians just so you can go in and make kidney punches then you step back and say "I didn't say that!".
It was you who bandied "they are guilty of indoctrination" and "they are guilty of pseudo-sexual imagery".
It is child abuse to force any child into a religion, It should be banned.
Let the children make up their own minds...Oh wait that would mean no more religion.
Dredging this up again? What happened did your other post finally peter out?
Do we need to start a thread that asks again what was your family discipline like and was it based on Christian doctrine?
You really need to see someone about this bitterness that you have against your parents who made you go to church.