Skip to comments.DeMint: U.N. Children’s Rights Treaty Would Turn Parental Rights ‘Over to International Community’
Posted on 08/06/2010 3:35:08 AM PDT by Man50D
Sen. Jim DeMint (R- S.C.) said that if President Barack Obama gets his way and the Senate ratifies the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the precedent would be set to place parental rights under the jurisdiction of the international community.
We believe we need to take clear action here in Congress to protect the rights of parents to raise their children," DeMint said at a Wednesday panel discussion. "This treaty would, in fact, establish a precedent that those rights have been given over to the international community."
DeMint is lead sponsor of S. Res. 519, a resolution to protect parental rights, which is co-sponsored by 30 senators total. Only four more senators need to sign on to inform President Obama that he does not have enough votes in the Senate to ratify the treaty, DeMint said.
DeMint has also introduced a joint resolution, proposing a constitutional amendment to protect parental rights.
Under Article 2, Section 2 of the U. S. Constitution, treaties must be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate for them to take effect.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Full Title: Sen. DeMint: Ratifying U.N. Childrens Rights Treaty Would Turn Parental Rights Over to International Community
Thank Goodness for Senator DeMint. As a father of five, I sincerely hope that his resolution is successful, and that the treaty is never ratified.
Sounds like Hillary’s “It Takes A Village”.
This is nostalgia for the days when rule of law actually meant something. What we will probably get is no Senate vote but a Czar of Children’s Rights who will push to the edges of the law and then some.
Now it’s “It Takes a Pillage” or “It Takes a Spillage.”
I like DeMint, and he is a good man...BUT:
A RESOLUTION is not a BILL....anything UN related is bad...pass a law via a BILL to do away with this obvious violation of parental rights.
Of course, we first need to get America out of the UN, and do away with Liberal Globalism. You begin this by doing away with the Liberal Free Trade Agreements (which are all supported by the UN).
End Liberal Globalism, and you end the UN influence. If you make no effort to do away with Liberal Globalism....you support the UN
The UN was such a cute camel’s nose — hey, it even gave nominal kudos for the establishment of Israel. It’s not such a cute stinking camel’s carcass occupying the tent now.
That’s the goal of communism. Eliminate the family so that the only authority is the government. Meanwhile, the parents would still have to PAY for the children’s upbringing. Yes, their money is still good but that’s all. The parents will have no say in the children’s moral upbringing.
Of course, the “international community” will teach the children about sex at age 5 and provide access to abortion starting at age 12.
This treaty not only gives your children the right of free association at any age, it also gives them the right to sexual consent at age 12.
Brazil is a signer of this treaty.
In a family court in Brazil, I saw the following admonition.
“Sex with children under 12 years of age is against the law.”
If the US ratifies this “treaty”, your children will have the “right” to engage in sexual activity with whomsoever they will, of whatever age or gender or genus, at the age of 12.
Too true. Or, given recent history, we’d see an executive order amounting to having signed it, so the One Who Must Not Be Blamed doesn’t have to worry about the pesky congresscritters.
In America today, the final parental authority over your child is a stranger in a black robe, supported by strangers in blue robes.
If it comes down to that, there is nothing you can do to/with/about/for your child if that stranger says you may not. Your rights are mere tissue now, when a child may be plucked from your home at the whim of a CPS agent you wouldn’t trust to babysit a garter snake.
If you don’t already know this, may you learn it secondhand.
file under “UN evidence”
. . . as I read ,, blood is shooting from my eyes ,,, but there’s no real surprise . The only thing parents will be good for is producing more fodder for the indoctrination process which begins in pre-school when the government takes control of your child .
DeMint said the threat to parental rights is not some theoretical threat.
Nations that ratify U.N. treaties are bound to adhere to them by international law.
He also said that ratification of the treaty would be a terrible precedent not just for parental rights, but in other areas that weve looked at.
This would open the door to more UN agenda. Demint also said Boxer is pushing hard for this.
They have no respect for our Constitution, but they seem to for the UN agenda, Boxer needs to.
This raises it’s ugly head every few months.
Just to let you know, it’s still an issue.
This needs Senate ratification.
Something to watch our “representatives” over.
The U.N. has had this in the making for years they just needed radical communist Obama.
For those of you that called me crazy over all of these years stating that THIS COULD NEVER happen and to go fly my black helo else where. I say: IT IS REAL! WAKE UP!!!
To the on the fence democrats supporting Obama because they JUST HAVE TO win the Left VS Right political divide-WAKE UP! If you are a radical progressive that likes this go play in another country cause it ain’t gonna happen in America! You are the minority percentage wise that wants this communism.
has some information that all parents should know
about this treaty.
Want your kid to have enforceable “rights” to hang out with whomever they wish (including your 14 yo daughter hanging out with that druggie 17 yr old kid)?
Want your son to have the “right” to view all the “information” (porn) that he wants?
Want your child to have the “right” to choose to not go to church?
It’s all in this “treaty”...
When you see the U. N. flag, just remember, there's
a lot of stuff that comes with it.
its our own government State Department brings in thousands and thousands of immigrants into the United States. Do you think it’s a coincidence the highest immigrant populations since 1992 to the present New York 40% California 30% Florida 25% Michigan 25% Pennsylvania 25% Texas 25% Now add up the electoral college numbers in those states. The Communist state department is doing their job..
ping to ping
The perverts want to have their way with America’s kids.
The Ninth Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Of course, the Muslim states will vote on fair ways to treat our daughters.
Time to close the UN down!!!!
KEEP AMERICAN SOVEREIGN!
There are NO DEMOCRATS co sponsoring the bill TO STOP this lunacy! VOTE ALL DEMS and FAKE pubs out!
Richard Lugar watch out for this guy (treaties)
DeMint: U.N. Childrens Rights Treaty Would Turn Parental Rights Over to International Community
I understand that he is correct although I don’t see how the Federal government has the authority to sign away individual rights that it doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to take itself.
The names of the 30 Senators please.
Remind me of all the benefits the US derives from being in the UN?
These rascals will never stop. They hate the American way.
Here you go.....
The U.N IS a joke with the same policies as Obama.
The Ninth AmendmentAs a matter of black letter law, you are correct. The great problem is to convince Washington that the law has to be respected. If it can push around the states, it can certainly push around the people.The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Therefore my contention is that, lacking representation in the Senate, the only recourse of the states would be to the amendment clause of the Constitution - specifically,
The Congress . . . on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the CongressIMHO the sovereign remedy for the contempt of Washington for the states would be an amendment which gave the states a real voice, which was removed by the Seventeenth Amendment which makes the Senate accountable to the people of the states rather than to the state governments.
Repeal of the Seventeenth would have great merit, but is probably politically impossible. But there should be some politically palatable mechanism by which the states could take control of the judiciary. They could, for example, make an amendment which reduced the size of SCOTUS to five justices, and demoted the last two justices named (ie, Sotomayor and Kagan) to appeals courts judges where they would do less harm. From then on, justices of SCOTUS would have a healthy respect for the rights of the states. And also, hopefully, of the people.
We should have kicked the UN out years ago.