Dark Cloud Shades UN's Women's Treaty

FOXnews.com ^ | June 18, 2002 | Wendy McElroy

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

The U.S. Senate is debating ratification of a U.N. treaty that has been pending for over two decades.

However, a stubborn cloud hangs over the treaty, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

Of the many reasons to oppose CEDAW, one of them is the U.N.'s probable complicity in China's one-child policy that forces women to abort pregnancies if they already have a child. It is a shadow that darkens all U.N. programs regarding women and children.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

This article reminded me of a UN report I saw once last year while searching for an unrelated topic (their website is as ungainly as their organization). It stated that there was a food surplus and yet there was still hunger. Why? Partially because of poor agricultural practices and partially because tyrants try to starve their subjects into submission.

The sickening part was how the report tried to twist that data into a statement that overpopulation was the key to everything.

If anyone wants the link to that report, I'll post it, but not unless someone asks. It's a pain going through that mess of a website.

[anniegetyourgun]

Ping.

[anniegetyourgun]

CLICK HERE.

[mewzilla]

Is the U.N. still attempting to legitimize and legalize prostitiution?

[madfly]

ping

[madfly]

Good find. Here's a snip.

"It's very likely that Senator Biden and Senator [Barbara] Boxer (D-Calif.) didn't want a true evaluation of this treaty and perhaps they were trying to use this as a way to cast aspersions on the administration," she said. "This appears to have been a manipulation tactic on the part of Senator Biden."

Wright agrees that Southwick would have been the perfect person to expose the flaws in CEDAW.

"He has been working on issues like this for quite a while. He knows how the U.N. works. He knows some of the problems with treaties and especially treaties like this that affect the family," she added. "There's no reason that Joe Biden should disparage someone like Michael Southwick."

The aritcle above is from Foxnews.com. I haven't heard a word on Fox cable on this hearing. This treaty is such an abomination, then you add Biden's outrageos behavior.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Wow.

Is it just me, or was Biden making absolutely no sense?

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Don't know. Last I heard, that was still part of the program. I'll do a search and see what recent news I can find.

[anniegetyourgun]

Usual behavior from that Senator. On a different subject, yesterday he said (in the same discussion) that Bush had the right to pre-emptive strike if deemed necessary and then minutes later said he didn't have the right to make that decision. He's a confused lib/dem.....or isn't that an oxymoron.

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

:)

[HarryDunne]

ping

[Democratic_Machiavelli]

Have to go now. Tried doing a search at the website. Don't have time to go through it all, but the little I looked at said that prostitution was a bad thing, but that the UN wasn't spending enough time trying to solve the problem.

I wonder why? :)

[HarryDunne]

bttt

[shaggy eel]

,,, bookmarking for read later today. BTTT

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Thank you for the ping. So little coverage of the Dem. mischief in the Senate..with the exception of FoxNews, but their coverage of CEDAW, hate crimes and cloning bills took a back seat to a missing child, dog mauling and car chase. For the record, last week the Sen. Dems. in all three major bills essentially said that they were wiser than God, that God was wrong. I think that the Dems. are now so dependent on their organized crime constituents in the lavender mafia and the JJackson extortion ring, they pushed pro-gay, anti-male, anti-family, anti-God legislation during the week of Father's Day while our nation's fighting a war on terrorism where it is essential that we behave for the watching world in an ethical manner. Could be the Dems. want us to lose the war (and our country) for personal political reasons? Unbelievable.

LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2001, ("HATE CRIMES" LEGISLATION), transcript, June 7, 2002.

[sarasmom]

" They call the treaty "a tool that women around the world can use in their struggle for basic human rights."

Right.Has anyone asked these women if they want the UN to decide what kind of society everyone will live in?In most of the third world countries, neither men or women have "basic" human rights.Why on earth would the USA support CEDAW when the ERA has been rejected in our country?

Change in womens rights come incrementally, just as does any long lasting change in any society.

There is enough war in the world, there is no need to escalate the war between the sexes in third world countries.A UN treaty will not stop the atrocious behavior of illiterate people who believe mutilating and controlling females is correct behavior. It will only bring a larger backlash to the voices of change from within the many societies which have a history of thousands of years.While I find many practices of many societies disgusting and ignorant,there is no magic wand which will make people change.

Universal literacy and exchanges of information will bring change to the entire worlds many cultures.I am too much a lover of freedom to support forcing others to behave and believe exactly as I do.

The UN should get out of New York, and the USA.It is not logical to assume that different cultures can duplicate what was created by the decendants of individuals who rejected many cultural norms and learned to live together, mostly peacefully.

This in no way means I support ignorance.I am fully aware of some societies depraved actions.I wholeheartedly advocate the total destruction of the culture which has declared war on mine.But that is an entirely different thread...