Senators line up to tell U.N. to leave kids alone 31 already committed to oppose treaty giving world

Senators line up to tell U.N. to leave kids alone 31 already committed to oppose treaty giving world body oversight of parents

www.wnd.com

Thirty-one Republican senators have agreed to oppose the United Nations' "Convention on the Rights of the Child" treaty, and critics of the international plan to vest children with a long list of rights – such as a right to seek government review of parental decisions – are looking for three more names.

The campaign by supporters of ParentalRights.org opposes an effort to put the U.N. advocacy plan into operation in the United States.

(visit the link for the full news article)

We need to be very careful of what the "UN" is up to. They want the right to intrude into the private lives of people and take your children away according to a "list" they have.
I'll list a couple of them here:

# Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.

# The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.

# A child's "right to be heard" would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

This is going way, way too far! Parents, do what it takes to keep this from happening! You must do it now because these people have a way of ramming through this kind of stuff while people are distracted. They will do it and they will do it as fast as lightning!

www.wnd.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 2282010 by Starbug3MY]

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 2282010 by Starbug3MY]

[edit on 2282010 by Starbug3MY]

You know this has been around since 1989 right? That every nation on Earth except Somalia and The US has been signed on for decades right? That the treaty does not give anyone the power to do anything right? That the treaty allows the UN to monitor, comment, and encourage states on the treatement of children and thats it right? Now I can see why the US has been in no hurry to sign up as children here already have all the rights suggested by the treaty so the net efffect would be zero here. I suppose these senators are going try and make an issue out of this and toss out some crazy ideas like they did the death panel crap during the healthcare debate and try and score some political points with the less informed. However in the end our signature would be just that, a signature. We already assure our children have there righs through dozens of organizations. I do not see a need to sign on to pledge to do something we already do but, I also think anyone who makes a show of opposing it is doing to so in the hopes that the American public is to stupid to figure things out.

what a crock of BS !!!

I hope the UN don't try to enforce
this piece of terror on the public.

Hey UN !!! It's not UR child
so stay the hell out !!!

WTF is this world comming to?

LEAVE OUR FAMILIES ALONE.

The only people who need to police Americans, are other Americans.

End of Story.

This is an election propaganda ploy.

These same US Senators have not stood up to American's right NOT to be arbitrarily assassinated abroad without due process or any reasonable grounds for suspiciion.

These same US Senators have not stood up to protect US citizens in Arizona.

These same US Senators have not stood up to defend the freedom of the Internet.

These same US Senators have not stood up to defend the American people from having their money stolen by the Federal Reserve and the Big Banksters.

These same US Senators have not sttod up to defend whistleblowers, and DEMAND enquiries into assassinations of whistleblowers.

These same US Senators have not stood up to DEMAND that the media ban on the Gulf be lifted.

These same US Senators have not demanded an immediate enquiry into all the evidence of CORRUPTION regarding the Gulf Oil spill.

These same US Senators have NOT demanded enquiries into the alarming increase of police violence against American citizens.

These same US Senators have NOT stood up against Zionist bribery of the Media and US Government.

These same US Senators are NOT calling for Bush to be tried for crimes against humanity for lying about Iraq WMD.


This is simply ELECTION PROPAGANDA, they are feeding the American people the same BS through the same MS Propaganda Machine, and people are immediately being suckered. I despair.

Same old, same old ploy - distract from the evil and corruption at home by creating an outside enemy, stand up to that enemy and get the people's support, then stamp on them even more once they have manipulated the dumb mass into giving them what they want.

People, wake up.

reply to post by Common Good


Now, why doesn't that same rule apply to Afghans or Iraqi's???

Why doesn't US get the h--l out of their countries and let Afghans and Iraqi's police and run their own countries???

Oh no, America has the right to interfere anywhere in the world, to bomb and kill at will whenever it wants - the world is there to serve America, right?

But NO-ONE has the right to interfere with America, right?

The only people who have the right to police Afghans are Afghans. End of story.

The only people who have the right to police Iraqis are Iraqis. End of story.

Or does hypocrisy rule OK for US?



[edit on 22-8-2010 by wcitizen]

Once the credit ratings agencies downgrade the United States, regardless if Republicans or Democrats run the country - watch how fast they run to the UN HQ.

reply to post by wcitizen


Yes but we are talking about our children. I have 2 boys, one is 19 and one is 16.

But they are trying to get control of our children as young as 5-years-old to indoctrinate them into accepting things that we do not want to expose them to.

Absolutely! Only parents should be allowed to screw up the children!

I fully and whole heartedly support the work United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and this particular initiative - Convention on the Rights of the Child.

It is habitual that US politicians react negatively to many international initiatives and in so doing cede the moral high-ground to other more enlightened nations, but weaken the initiative because of it e.g. the Kyoto Protocol or the Ottawa Treaty to name but two.

In this particular initiative where the US has little to hide by the way it treats its children, the focus is on those nations who have such shoddy contempt for life and rights that children have zero protection. Only the US and Somalia has not ratified this Convention.

I do wonder whether US politicians have lost the plot sometimes and are so stuck up their own backsides that cannot see past their own small-town mentality. They defend their decisions by over analysing and imaging how things will be. Sad really.

Convention on the Rights of the Child

Regards

How about reading the actual convention instead of screaming OH NOES!!! UN!!!111!!?

www2.ohchr.org...

Of course there is this certain ideological subset on ATS that equates "UN" with "Satan" and such, but let's be level-headed about this for one time.

First of all, what's the source of the article? WND - arguably one of the most radical right-wing outlets the american blogosphere has, infamous for perpetuating the "Obama is a muslim" and the "Obama is not American" meme and other such things.

Second. The spin of the article. The article is made out to portray said Senators - mostly Republican and up for re-election - as the last bastion against foreign legislation intended to kindap and indoctrinate our kids. Is that so? Or is this just a partisan publication trying to shed a good light on politicians that didn't have much positive traction through this year? Consider it election propaganda.

Which should not keep us from discussing the actual convention. Firstly - is it something new and radical? How new is it, exactly?

As of November 2009, 194 countries have ratified, accepted, or acceded to it (some with stated reservations or interpretations) including every member of the United Nations except Somalia and the United States.[4][6] Somalia has announced that it would shortly do so.

Along with Somalia, the United States is one of only two countries in the world which have not ratified the Convention

en.wikipedia.org...

So basically, for all but the US it is in effect. Have you heard of UN kidnappings an forced indoctrinations from Europe? What happened after the rest of the world adopted the convention? Did UN troops come to snatch their kids or did ratifying the convention have a positive effect on children's interests and standing before the law?

I don't know about you but to me it seems the latter is the case.

Is this convention inherently un-american?

The United States government played an active role in the drafting of the Convention and signed it on 16 February 1995, but has not ratified it.

Ah. So it is American, even in its inception. Interesting.

So what does the convention say, actually? It consists of 54 articles, none of which mention indoctrination or kindapping, but things like the following:

Article 2

1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians, or family members.

.....

Article 6

1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life.

2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child.

....

Article 11

1. States Parties shall take measures to combat the illicit transfer and non-return of children abroad.

2. To this end, States Parties shall promote the conclusion of bilateral or multilateral agreements or accession to existing agreements.

As a former kid and future parent, I can't help but think that this not nefarious at all. And indeed, it seems that the law does help the courts to better secure childrens rights:

The European Court of Human Rights has made reference to the Convention when interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights

footnoted to:

Sutherland, Elaine E. (2003). "Can International Conventions Drive Domestic Law Reform? The Case of Physical Punishment of Children" in Dewar J., Parker S. (eds.) Family law: processes, practices, pressures: proceedings of the Tenth World Conference of the International Society of Family Law, July 2000, Brisbane, Australia. Oxford: Hart, p. 488

Read the abstract - it seems that international conventions indeed can drive domestic law reform as she demonstrates with the example of said convention and physical punishment of children.

Deny Ignorance.

[edit on 22-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 22-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 22-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

Originally posted by wcitizen
This is an election propaganda ploy.

And look! It worked!

reply to post by Starbug3MY

reply to post by Common Good

reply to post by boondock-saint



Translations: WHAT DO YOU MEAN I CAN'T RAISE MY CHILD TO BE A VIRTUOUS SOLDIER IN MY PERSONAL WAR??

Eh, just more reason not to have children. Imagine the government inspecting the home because you ground your kids.

reply to post by MrSpad




I gave my daughter a copy of the UN Declaration of Children's Rights as soon as she could read.

I think it made her -and me- a better person.

reply to post by 547000


Maybe it is best for parents to revise their disciplinary methods. Grounding a child is equivalent to, and based on, the penal system. Do you really think that a loving parent treats their child like a convict? "Tough love" has always seemed self-contradictory to me, it has always seemed to be the way that disgruntled war veterans would treat the children whom they cannot identify with, having lost their own innocence.

reply to post by paraphi
Thank you for giving the link. I find that the vast majority of Americans would rather argue about a thing rather than look at the thing they are arguing about.

reply to post by pthena


Tell me oh wise one, what does signing a TREATY have to do with anything?

A treaty has NO power whatsover in the US.

If any court or any politician was to quote from ANY international paper, they SHOULD be arrested and tried on Treason.

Those saying, "just look at it, it is gooooood", have no idea that it is all encompassing. Just keep piling on these gooooood things on everyone.

Oh well, instead of a common law court where COMMON SENSE rules, we now have jurisdictional courts for every aspect of our lives.

Then someone on this thread actually has THE GAUL to tell people that grounding is equivalent to prison.

How old are you, 10? Are you grounded right now? Are your parents meanys?

WOW, anyone tells me how to raise my children and attempts to interfere with my family, better damn well bring the US military widim.

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
Maybe it is best for parents to revise their disciplinary methods. Grounding a child is equivalent to, and based on, the penal system. Do you really think that a loving parent treats their child like a convict? "Tough love" has always seemed self-contradictory to me, it has always seemed to be the way that disgruntled war veterans would treat the children whom they cannot identify with, having lost their own innocence.

well tough love seemed to work for me.
I got spankings A LOT as a child but I deserved
every single one of them.

And look at me now !!!!

I'm labeled an agent on ATS
a terrorist to ADL
an @$$hole by ex-wife
and many many many more

BUT

I've never been arrested