For those interested.... This is an email I received from www.parentalrights.org Much prayer is needed regarding this issue.
A Letter from Michael Farris,
President of ParentalRights.org.
Dear Friend of Parental Rights,
I was in the United States Senate this past week meeting with lawyers for a Senate office. They told me directly what I have been hearing indirectly on a regular basis ever since the election.
Those who want to change family policy in America to comply with international law are preparing a full-scale effort to seek ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child during this next Congress. Barbara Boxer recently told a planning group that they intend to use children's health care as leverage to seek ratification of this UN children's rights treaty.
Please link to our website to see a succinct summary of the problems with this UN treaty.
The strength of their forces has been greatly increased with the addition of Hillary Clinton as the nominee for Secretary of State. She will have direct control over the submission of this treaty to the Senate and will acquire the authority under international law to sign any other treaty on any subject.
Hillary Clinton was the person who made the announcement for the Convention on the Rights of the Child when her husband's administration signed the treaty. Seeking its ratification is a lifelong dream for her.
Our situation is grim if we were to look only at the position of the elected officials.
However, recent post-election polling demonstrates that almost 70% of Americans do not believe that the use of international law in American courts on such matters is appropriate. Less than 20% favor the use of international law. (The rest are undecided). Virtually every sub-group in America opposes this kind of use of international law.
America is on our side. However, we have to be able to get the word out to help people hear the truth about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Our proposed Parental Rights Amendment will permanently stop this treaty. So we have a one-two punch planned for the internationalists.
First, we must build a huge grassroots movement of patriotic Americans who believe that good families should be able to raise their children without worrying about compliance with international law.
Second, these same grassroots forces need to convince our elected officials that we are not content with defeating this treaty for today alone. We insist on a permanent solution. We need the Parental Rights Amendment.
I need you to do two things to help this become a reality. First, please send a copy of this letter to everyone you know who believes in parental rights and American patriotism.
Second, we need to raise a war chest to get prepared to launch a massive grassroots campaign. The other side has millions of dollars left in their campaign coffers, and they have the President of the United States, the Secretary of State and all the media waiting to carry their message.
We can win the debate because we have the truth on our side. And we have public opinion. But we won't win if we can't reach people.
Will you please make as big a gift as you can to support Parentalrights.org?
Here is what they are saying about us. At the hearing which featured Barbara Boxer, one of the speakers said that the people who will oppose this treaty are the "narcissistic sovereignty crowd." In other words, those who love America first are so guilty of excessive self-love that he describes us as having the mental illness of narcissism.
This is their real heart. Not only do they want international law to control our families. They think that we are mentally ill for loving America.
It is time for those of us who believe in loving our families and loving America to rise up! We will not surrender this country or our children to such people.
Get involved today! The battle is about to begin.
For God, family, and America,
Michael Farris
Please contribute now -- the need is great!
Gifts to parentalrights.org are not tax deductible. These gifts, however, enable us to engage in "political" actions like petitioning Congress to pass the Amendment.
Tax-deductible gifts can also be made, through Home School Foundation. Just check the box next to ParentalRights.org fund. These gifts fund our efforts to educate the public to the dangers that threaten our families.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 65
Based upon a quick glance, it seems like this type of thing that is needed.
The Convention acknowledges that every child has certain basic rights, including the right to life, his or her own name and identity, to be raised by his or her parents within a family or cultural grouping and have a relationship with both parents, even if they are separated.
The Convention obliges states to allow parents to exercise their parental responsibilities. The Convention also acknowledges that children have the right to express their opinions and to have those opinions heard and acted upon when appropriate, to be protected from abuse or exploitation, to have their privacy protected and requires that their lives not be subject to excessive interference.
The Convention also obliges signatory states to provide separate legal representation for a child in any judicial dispute concerning their care and asks that the child's viewpoint be heard in such cases. The Convention forbids capital punishment for children.
The Convention also has two optional protocols, adopted by the General Assembly in May 2000 and applicable to those states that have signed and ratified them: The Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography.
Perhaps is it just wing-nuts who insist on the idiocy of objecting to every piece of progressive legislation who are against this?
This treaty must be ratified ASAP.
Are you ready for the holidays~
THE POINTS DEPOT
1. It changes the legal standard for government intervention into family decisions.
Under current American law, the government can only intervene and overturn a parental decision if there is legally sufficient proof that the parent has harmed the child (that is, has committed child abuse or neglect).
Under the UNCRC, the standard is the "best interests of the child." This means that the government can intervene whenever it thinks that its decision is better for the child than the decision made by the parent.
2. The child acquires a legal right to be heard by the government in every decision affecting the child. It is not enough for the parents to listen to the child. The child's voice must be heard by a party with the power to overturn the parent's decision. Example, if the parents think the child is too young for a facebook account, the child has the right to be heard on this by the government. This is the meaning of the right to be heard.
3. All state laws on parent-child relationships will be overturned when in conflict with international law. Under Article VI of the US Constitution, (the Supremacy Clause), whenever we adopt a treaty, all state laws and constitutions are automatically overridden. Since virtually all law on parent-child relationships is state law, this is nearly a wholesale replacement of American law with international law.
There is no doubt that we need good laws for the protection of children. The key issue is: Who should make this law? Under the UNCRC, the fundamental policy decisions are made when we ratify this international treaty. American sovereignty is no longer in place in a traditional sense. The policy choices are limited to answering this question: What is the best method of complying with this treaty.
4. Spanking is banned entirely by this treaty.
5. It is illegal to put juvenile murderers in prison for life.
6. Socialized child-care, health-care, education, food, clothing, and shelter are all mandatory.
7. It is illegal to allow a parent to take their child out of a sex education class in the public schools unless the government first reviews the decision of the parent to consider two factors: 1. the government's view of what is best for the child and 2. the child's wishes.
I could go on at great length.
Most Americans would agree with a certain percentage of the goals stated in this treaty. This includes me. However, we should never surrender the principle of American self-government. Only elected American leaders should make our law.
Michael Farrris
Why would a sovreign nation CHOOSE to give up their power and rights to a higher authority? That is foolish beyond measure.
I would love to donate to the goup Renita. Only prayer and interventio of God can save the separation of countries at this time. I say this foolish mind set comes from the inborn need to have someone higher than yourself take care of you and give you the security we long for.
Rather than turning to God they're looking for a human deliverer. One is coming. The world is primed to receive him. Too bad.
hh 1/6/09
PIF
This treaty must be ratified ASAP."
Based on what you have posted in your comment, the treaty reads like the declaration of independence, but with one important difference. We as a nation will nolonger be independent. We already have laws in place that protect children and the means to enact further laws. Why must we add yet another layer of government and perhaps another layer of taxes to do what we as a nation can already do? Face it, comrade, we Americans are wing nuts. We love our freedom and independence. That's why our nation is what it is--a great nation.
<font size="1">IBSEXXY.COM</font>
Here's some much needed,
PIF
If children were capable of raising themselves, this treaty would be fine. Since children need parents and guardians to teach them manners, morals, discipline, values, and everything else they need to know before becoming adults, the treaty is ridiculous. I'm not convinced that the goal is to give children rights as much as it is to limit their education and destroy families and their freedom.
Yes, I've read it and it's shocking. It threatends freedom of religion. Home Bible study and religious schools will be illegal? Change indeed. Shameful change.
I don't get it, of course I've always followed the states idea of how a child should be raised... then I got my children taken from me because I'm supposedly doing a bad job. Then they send me to a Christian Parenting class as part of my service agreement to get my children back. So, I think the moral of the story is that people are people and it's giving power to PEOPLE not 'the government' because the government is not some separate thing that makes no mistakes. It's made up of PEOPLE. And people make mistakes, people operate on opinion. So, I'm guessing this law if it is signed means that I'd never get my children back. Kind of funny that I'm being told that I'm a selfish person for wanting my children back. And when my daughters say they want to come back I'm told that they are 'brainwashed' interesting. Really.
Whoops, got carried away, PIF
This is an outrage. I sure hope it doesn't pass. PIF
I agree with some of the things in the Rights of the Child treaty but not everything.
I agree - I'm all for protecting children from abuse. I mean, who isn't aside from abusers. But to tell a parent they cannot discipline a child in a way a child doesn' t like (and what child LIKES discipline) is ludicrous
thanks for sharing