- It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law. It is no mere statement of altruism.
- Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.
- Children of other nations would not be impacted in any direct way by our ratification.
- The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of our Supremacy Clause.
- 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.
- The Courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.
- 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.
- 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.
- Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.
- 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.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
Finally, after waiting nine months, to complete the task, HJR 369, the resolution urging our US Senators to REJECT the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, passed the State Senate on Monday evening, February 22. Readers may recall the problem we had in the Senate on the last day of the 2009 session (Here). With little debate, the final vote was 26-3-1. It has been sent to the Governor for his signature.
We are very grateful to the 26 Senators who supported HJR 369. We do wonder why the others are not concerned about ratifying a treaty that would, based on Article VI of the US Constitution, become the law of the land and give to the United Nations and an 18-member committee meeting in Geneva the authority to oversee and enforce the provisions of the document that would move the recognized 'needs' of children into 'rights under international law' and could interfer with the right of families to raise their children as they see fit as well as interfere with states rights and family law.
Senators voting aye were: Beavers, Black, Bunch, Burchett, Burks, Crowe, Faulk, Finney L, Ford, Gresham, Henry, Herron, Jackson, Johnson, Kelsey, Ketron, McNally, Norris, Overbey, Southerland, Stewart, Tracy, Watson, Woodson, Yager, Mr. Speaker Ramsey -- 26.
Senators voting no were: Berke, Harper, Marrero -- 3.
Senators present and not voting were: Haynes -- 1.
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child by Whitney Ann Dotson
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child was signed by the Clinton Administration in 1995, but, thankfully, has never been ratified by the United State Senate. First, ANY United Nations treaty is suspect on its face. Second, according to Article VI, any treaty ratified by the US Senate becomes 'law of the land':
Because of the Democrat control Sen. Barbara Boxer (California) wants to bring this treaty up for ratification.
This MUST NOT happen. Rep. Mike Bell (R-Riceville) has introduced a resolution urging the US Senate to reject this proposal.
Memorials, Congress - Urges United States Senate to reject ratification of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
On June 1, 2009, HRJ 369 passed the House 70-20-2.
On June 15, is passed the Senate Finance Committee 8-1-1.
On June 18, it was on the Senate floor for the third time after having been posponed two times. Because it had been left off the Calendar, a motion was made to suspend the rules to place it back before the body. Themotion to suspend requires 22 votes. When the votes went up it was 20-11, meaning the motion failed. HRJ 369 will be brought back to the calendar in January!
In additional to reading the "Ten Things You Need to Know" below, you will want to check out these links:
In addition to this state effort, at the Federal level, a Parental Rights Amendment to the US Constitution is being introduced to permanently protect parents rights.
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to parental rights.
Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC.
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.
- 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.
- Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
- 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.
- 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.
- According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
- Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
- Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.
- Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
- Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.