Parents and grandparents need to be vigilant with regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child(CRC). Please bring yourself up to date on this threatening treaty of the United Nations. This treaty, a looming threat to parents and their rights, is nothing new - I recall rallying against this UN proposal, in the 1990's as we home schooled our children and wanted to defend that right that we cherished as parents (in addition to numerous other parental rights).
Madeline Albright, past U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, signed the Convention on the Rights of the Child on behalf of the United States, however, the treaty was never sent to the Senate for ratification. This treaty looms again over our nation as the likes of Senator Barbara Boxer supports its ratification by our government.
Two vital aspects of this treaty are:
Government can override parental decisions on the best interest of the child without proof of abuse, neglect, or harm.
Children have legally enforceable rights to complain about parental decision-making in every area of their life, including religious and educational decisions.
To review this treaty in its entirety, go to: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025.htm
An excellent summary of this frightening proposal is offered on the HSLDA website, written by Michael Farris, JD. In part, this summary states:
Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC:It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law. It is no mere statement of altruism. (1)
Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.(2)
Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification. (3)
The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI. (4)
The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, others would require implementing legislation. Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing. (5)
The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.(6)
Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty. This would be the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history.(7)
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 policy authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee. (8)
Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution. (9)
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. (10)
Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.(11)
A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.(12)
Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion. (13)
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. (14)
A child’s “right to be heard” would allow them to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed. (15)
This treaty has been interpreted to make it illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare. (16)
Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure. (17)
Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC. (18)
Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC. (19)
Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services without parental knowledge or consent. (20)
REFERENCES: 1 Page 3, paragraph 1 of this document and pages 17–19.
2 Pages 4–5 of this document, and pages 17–19.
3 Page 5, paragraph 4 of this document, and footnote 22.
4 Pages 17–19 of this document.
5 Page 21, paragraphs 1–2 of this document.
6 Pages 8–9 of this document.
7 Page 5 of this document.
8 Page 9 of this document.
9 Page 4 of this document.
10 Pages 19–20 of this document.
11 Page 5, paragraphs 4–5 of this document.
12 Page 15, paragraph 1 of this document.
13 Page 27, paragraph 4 of this document.
14 Pages 10–12 of this document.
15 Page 26 of this document.
16 Page 9, paragraph 2 of this document.
17 Page 15, paragraph 1 of this document.
18 The American Bar Association, which supports the CRC, said that a Christian school’s refusal to teach “alternate worldviews” would “fly in the face of article 29” of the treaty. Children’s Rights in America: U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child Compared with United States Law, Cynthia Price Cohen and Howard Davidson, ed., (1990) p. 182. Ms. Cohen was a member of the Ad Hoc NGO Group on the Drafting of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Mr. Davidson is the Director of the American Bar Association’s Center on Children and the Law. The book was published by the ABA in 1990 and is available from that organization. It is cited throughout as (ABA).
19 Pages 12–14 of this document.
20 Supra, and pages 26–27.
