Hays, Kansas Where Individuals Become A Community With A Voice |
|
| Parental rights under attack | |
| | Author | Message |
---|
LukeTHr All Star
Number of posts : 1936 Age : 64 Registration date : 2008-03-26
| Subject: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:02 pm | |
| It would seem the good folks at the U.N. are still working to get the United States to sign onto an agreement that would weaken the rights of parents even more. I think this would be pure poison for our society and would further the erosion of our country by the removal of the parents as the ones to make the decisions in dealing with the discipline, care and raising of their children. As long as the child is well cared for and not being abused, I don't think the government should have anything to say about how parents raise their children. for your reading pleasure....... - Quote :
- Sen. Barbara Boxer is urging the U.S. to ratify a United Nations measure meant to expand the rights of children, a move critics are calling a gross assault on parental rights that could rob the U.S. of sovereignty.
The California Democrat is pushing the Obama administration to review the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, a nearly 20-year-old international agreement that has been foundering on American shores since it was signed by the Clinton administration in 1995 but never ratified.
Critics say the treaty, which creates "the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" and outlaws the "arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy," intrudes on the family and strips parents of the power to raise their children without government interference.
Nearly every country in the world is party to it -- only the U.S. and Somalia are not -- but the convention has gained little support in the U.S. and never been sent to the Senate for ratification.
That could change soon.
Boxer has made clear her intent to revive the ratification process under the Obama administration, which may be amenable to the move. During a Senate confirmation hearing last month, Boxer said she considers it "a humiliation" that the U.S. is "standing with Somalia" in refusing to become party to the agreement, while 193 other nations have led the way.
The U.S. is already party to two optional pieces of the treaty regarding child soldiers and child prostitution and pornography, but has refused to sign on to the full agreement, something which has rankled members of Congress, including Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
"Children deserve basic human rights ... and the convention protects children's rights by setting some standards here so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected," Boxer said.
The convention has established a Committee on the Rights of the Child, an 18-member panel in Geneva composed of "persons of high moral character" who review the rights of children in nations that are party to the convention.
But legal experts say the convention does nothing to protect human rights abroad -- and that acceding to the convention would erode U.S. sovereignty.
Because of the Supremacy Clause in Article VI of the Constitution, all treaties are rendered "the supreme law of the land," superseding preexisting state and federal statutes. Any rights or laws established by the U.N. convention could then be argued to hold sway in the United States.
"To the extent that an outside body, a group of unaccountable so-called experts in Switzerland have a say over how children in America should be raised, educated and disciplined -- that is an erosion of American sovereignty," said Steven Groves, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.
Parental rights groups are similarly stirred; they see in the U.N. convention a threat that the government will meddle with even the simplest freedoms to raise their children as they see fit.
"Whether you ground your kids for smoking marijuana, whether you take them to church, whether you let them go to junior prom, all of those things . . . will be the government's decision," said Michael Farris, president of ParentalRights.org. "It will affect every parent who's told their children to do the dishes."
Groves said that erosion has already begun, as the Supreme Court has referred to the wide acceptance of the child-rights law in conferring legal protections on minors in the U.S.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing the majority opinion in the 2005 decision banning the death penalty for minors, noted that "every country in the world has ratified [the convention] save for the United States and Somalia."
Proponents of the convention in the U.S. stress that it will help secure human rights abroad.
"Now, all you have to do is look around the world and see these girls that are having acid thrown in their face," Boxer said in January, implying that the U.S. refusal to come aboard has led to abuses elsewhere.
But when acceding to the convention, countries are able to sign so-called RUDs -- reservations, understandings and declarations -- that can hinder or negate responsibilities they would otherwise be bound to follow.
Most majority Muslim nations express reservations on all provisions of the convention that are incompatible with Islamic Sharia law, which takes much of the teeth out of the treaty. Acid attacks on girls continue in Afghanistan, which is already party to the convention.
The U.N. itself admits that there is no way for it to enforce its own laws and protect children.
"When it comes to signatories who violate the convention and/or its optional protocols -- there is no means to oblige states to fulfill their legal obligations," said Giorgia Passarelli, a spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commission on Human Rights, which oversees the child-rights body.
Passarelli said that the committee has kept a constant spotlight on rights violators and fed into decisions made by the Security Council, especially involving child soldiers. But even then, she added, such pressure does not always prevail.
Despite these obstacles, Boxer has made clear that she intends to ramp up pressure to get the treaty ratified, a passion that may be shared by the Obama administration.
During the Oct. 22, 2008, presidential youth debate, Obama promised to "review this and other treaties to ensure the United States resumes its global leadership in human rights."
During U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's January confirmation hearing, Rice called the convention "a very important treaty and a noble cause," and said it was "a shame" for the U.S. to be in company with Somalia, which has no real government.
Rice told Boxer that "there can be no doubt that [President Obama] and Secretary Clinton and I share a commitment to the objectives of this treaty and will take it up as an early question," promising to review the treaty "to ensure that the United States is playing and resumes its global leadership role in human rights."
Boxer, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, pushed for a 60-day timetable to review the convention and report back to the Senate -- which would have left the Obama administration a March 23 deadline to move toward ratification.
Rice politely sidestepped and refused to agree to the timeline.
"This is a complicated treaty, in many respects more than some others, given our system of federalism, and so we need to take a close look at how we manage the challenges of domestic implementation and what reservations and understandings might be appropriate in the context of ratification," she said.
Boxer's office, which ignored repeated calls and e-mails seeking comment, has not spelled out what if any reservations the senator would like to assert in ratifying the treaty. The State Department also refused to comment on timetables.
| |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:08 pm | |
| | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:16 pm | |
| Here is a LINK with a bunch of Countries that have a Bunch of Objections to it. Spoiler: it is a very long read but interestingHere is the actual UN Resolution LINK For Factual Purposes to make sure it is not misreported or misstated. from the above link: This stuff doesn't look all that aggregious to me. 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 5 States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention. Article 8 1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference. Article 9 1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence. 2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.
3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child's best interests.
4. Where such separation results from any action initiated by a State Party, such as the detention, imprisonment, exile, deportation or death (including death arising from any cause while the person is in the custody of the State) of one or both parents or of the child, that State Party shall, upon request, provide the parents, the child or, if appropriate, another member of the family with the essential information concerning the whereabouts of the absent member(s) of the family unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall of itself entail no adverse consequences for the person(s) concernedArticle 14 1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. Article 27 1. States Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development. 2. The parent(s) or others responsible for the child have the primary responsibility to secure, within their abilities and financial capacities, the conditions of living necessary for the child's development.
3. States Parties, in accordance with national conditions and within their means, shall take appropriate measures to assist parents and others responsible for the child to implement this right and shall in case of need provide material assistance and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, clothing and housing.
4. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to secure the recovery of maintenance for the child from the parents or other persons having financial responsibility for the child, both within the State Party and from abroad. In particular, where the person having financial responsibility for the child lives in a State different from that of the child, States Parties shall promote the accession to international agreements or the conclusion of such agreements, as well as the making of other appropriate arrangements. Article 28 1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular: (a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;
(b) Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education, make them available and accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education and offering financial assistance in case of need;
(c) Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means;
(d) Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children;
(e) Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention.
3. States Parties shall promote and encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries. Article 34 States Parties undertake to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. For these purposes, States Parties shall in particular take all appropriate national, bilateral and multilateral measures to prevent: (a) The inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawful sexual activity;
(b) The exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful sexual practices;
(c) The exploitative use of children in pornographic performances and materials. Article 37 States Parties shall ensure that: (a) No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age;
(b) No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time;
(c) Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age. In particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances;
(d) Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legality of the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent, independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on any such action.
Last edited by slider on Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:05 pm; edited 2 times in total | |
| | | nitromaxx98 All Star
Number of posts : 3515 Location : Here, Duh... Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:59 pm | |
| As determined by the government? | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:03 pm | |
| 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.
Where will it erode the protections under our Constitution? Explain that please. | |
| | | nitromaxx98 All Star
Number of posts : 3515 Location : Here, Duh... Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:18 pm | |
| Let me re-phrase.
As determined by the government! | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:28 pm | |
| The way I read it and please look at the underlined portion of Section 1, the Treaty respects the rights of each Child within their Jurisdiction - IE Their Country of Origin's Consititution. | |
| | | nitromaxx98 All Star
Number of posts : 3515 Location : Here, Duh... Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:48 pm | |
| Sometimes you have to read between the lines. Americas children are already protected under our Constitution. Therefore why would we need to sign the agreement unless someting else was in mind? | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 5:52 pm | |
| Okay, if the Constitution guarantees that our children are protected, then why the big panties in a twist rant about Planned Parenthood? | |
| | | nitromaxx98 All Star
Number of posts : 3515 Location : Here, Duh... Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:01 pm | |
| - slider wrote:
- Okay, if the Constitution guarantees that our children are protected, then why the big panties in a twist rant about Planned Parenthood?
You got kids? | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:09 pm | |
| Yep I sure do, why did I raise wrong according to the Laws of the State and/or Federal Governments? | |
| | | nitromaxx98 All Star
Number of posts : 3515 Location : Here, Duh... Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 6:19 pm | |
| - slider wrote:
- Yep I sure do, why did I raise wrong according to the Laws of the State and/or Federal Governments?
Nope, just asking. p.s. I don't wear panties. | |
| | | slider Major Leaguer
Number of posts : 1289 Age : 67 Registration date : 2008-06-27
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:06 pm | |
| boxers, tightie whities, briefs, I guess if going commando then it would be your zipper causing the problems | |
| | | The Other One All Star
Number of posts : 3675 Registration date : 2008-03-25
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:36 am | |
| Screw the UN. Without us, they wouldn't survive. We should kick their anti-American asses out of New York and cut off all funding to them. Why the hell should the already overburdened American taxpayer be forced to financially support this shit? | |
| | | Guest Guest
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am | |
| I'd participate in this discussion if somebody could condense it down to 5 lines, or less. |
| | | Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Parental rights under attack | |
| |
| | | | Parental rights under attack | |
|
Similar topics | |
|
| Permissions in this forum: | You cannot reply to topics in this forum
| |
| |
| |
|