Most people are fully aware that John Kerry has signed a key treaty that surrenders U.S. sovereignty, and gun rights to the United Nations. Awaiting ratification in the senate, where enough current senators have vowed against its ratification, the treaties future is unknown. Disarming American citizens however, is a priority of highest importance to the Obama administration. For those that doubt this just look at how rapidly he is disarming our own military, leaving us vulnerable to many threats at home and abroad. Unfortunately, this is not the only treaty that awaits ratification in the senate, nor is it the only one that could be used to strip the Bill of Rights away from American citizens. The United Nations Conventions on the Rights of a Child is another dangerous treaty that has made its way to our senate for ratification, and like the small arms treaty, it would surrender our sovereignty to a world governing body.
What does the U.N. Conventions on the Rights of a Child do if ratified in the U.S? It would be the final nail in the coffin for parental rights, putting all authority of raising children into the hands of state bureaucracies, as opposed to parents. This would be done under the assumption that the state, run by academic and social elites, knows what is best for your child when it comes to proper development, and under the guise of protecting their rights, would have authority to supersede any of your decisions as care givers.
According to the treaty, the child would have the absolute right to a free, state provided education, health care, a guarantee to be safe from harm, and a right to be able to develop their own religious views, as long as those views conform to the limitations established by existing U.N. laws concerning religious expression, of course. It would be easy to imagine many people (liberals and communists) viewing this treaty as great progress that ensures equality and strengthens democracy; however, it does nothing but stifle freedom and guarantees your child will grow up indoctrinated into the “statist” collective worldview.
While the treaty guarantees the child has a right to a free education, it has to be stressed that they intend to insist that is a free, state provided education. Few people can argue that there isn’t a movement to eliminate homeschooling in the United States. Parents who home school are often marginalized and in fact, many home school curriculums have had to conform to state standards. Do you see where this going? In Germany, under the authority of this treaty, parents are being arrested for homeschooling their children. In fact, parents who continue to home school in defiance of this treaty are being subjected to military style raids that result in the abduction of their children by government agents. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/we-are-empty-german-homeschooling-family-raided-four-children-seized-by-gov
If that isn’t bad enough; in Scotland, the passage of this treaty has resulted in the assigning of a full time social worker to every child in the country. The social worker is supposed to be there to monitor the child’s development and intervene in the event the parents are making ill informed decisions. http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/17748-citing-un-treaty-scotland-assigns-overseer-to-every-child While many reading this article may scoff at the idea of this happening in America, out of a sense of urgency I need to remind the reader of my education in social work. I can assure you, there are many people who would view this development as a positive step forward because a great deal of social work education revolves around the idea that the traditional family structure is an oppressive institution. The prevailing attitude among many in the field is one of intellectual superiority. They believe their education in social science and human behavior makes them better suited than you.
In the long run, the ratification of this treaty could very well replace the need to ratify the small arms treaty. Again, we are focusing on the idea that bureaucrats know better, and if they can convince the up and coming generation that guns are dangerous, and their very presence is “threatening to the safety of a child,” they can get them to accept that families shouldn’t have guns in the house. Especially if there is a government social worker assigned to every child monitoring the safety practices in the home.
It would be difficult to argue that parental rights in America are not already under assault. State agencies have shown us that they are willing and able to conduct military style raids on homes and abduct children under the guise of safety. While in some instances there is a legitimate need for intervention, in others, children are abducted and find themselves living in worse conditions than what they were being “saved from.” Stripping rights away from parents who love their children; and putting those rights into the hands of an unfeeling, unattached bureaucracy is not how you ensure the safety of children. Only a society that empowers parents with laws that enable them to stand and protect their children, laws that empower them to instill values that teach morality, responsibility and respect can do that. This treaty must not become law in the U.S.