A REAL and URGENT radical threat to the family and American sovereignty!

Senator Boxer To Call for Swift Action on U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

By Denise Burke | February 10, 2009

Recently, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) promised to call on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the U.S. State Department to complete its review of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and to send it to the Senate for ratification within 60 days.

If ratified, this international convention could severely undermine parents and their inherent right and responsibility to care for and raise their children without governmental oversight and interference. It would also directly undermine U.S. sovereignty and the enforceability of American laws, subjecting U.S. citizens and American laws to the administrative oversight — and even “veto” power — of the United Nations.

A fundamental presumption of the convention is that parental responsibility exists only in so far as parents are willing to further the independent choices of their children. To advance the convention’s purposes – seeking to make children (even young children) autonomous from their parents and arguably supplanting parents with the State — the convention grants to children a list of inviolable and radical “rights” including “the right to privacy,” “the right to freedom of thought and association,” and the right to “freedom of expression.”

Specifically, the provisions of this convention could be used to undermine and eliminate laws mandating parental involvement in a minor daughter’s abortion decision. Article 16 of the convention purports to invest a minor with an absolute right to privacy which, in light of the U.N.’s support for unfettered abortion-on-demand, would necessarily permit a minor to obtain an abortion without the benefit of parental involvement and even without her parents ever knowing about the abortion.

Ominously, Article 19 the Convention permits the “identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up” of those – like parents – who interfere with a child’s fundamental “rights.”

For more information on this radical threat to the family and American sovereignty, go to THIS LINK.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE UN CRC (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child):

20 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW

Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC.

1. It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law. It is no mere statement of altruism.
2. Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.
3. Children of other nations would not be impacted in any direct way by our ratification.
4. The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of our Supremacy Clause.
5. The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation. Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing.
6. The Courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.
7. Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty. This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.
8. A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures. This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee.
9. Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.
10. Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC.

1. Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
2. A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.
3. Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
7. Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
8. Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
9. Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
10. Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.
    

For a full explanation of all of these points, check out Mike Farris's article, Nannies in Blue Berets.