UN sovereignty over your children

[coadie]

The liberals are racing to give away US sovereignty. It has been children for a while.

‘Narcissistic Sovereignty’ Has Kept U.S. from Ratifying U.N. Treaty on Children’s Rights
Monday, November 24, 2008
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

Washington, D.C. (CNSNews.com) – Advocates for a United Nations treaty on children’s rights blamed American arrogance for it not being ratified by the United States, but critics charge signing onto the Convention on the Rights of the Child could mean international law trumping U.S. state and federal laws and the rights of parents to make decisions about raising and educating their children.
The treaty, adopted by the United Nations on Nov. 20, 1989, has been ratified by 193 countries. The United States and Somalia are the two countries that have not ratified it, groups that support ratification said at a press conference at the Capitol on Thursday.

Just for the record, the inspectors can violate our constitutional rights to privacy. They could enter a home withiout a complaint and decide to check it out.

“It might sound dismissive, but I think it has something to do with what I would call, and some other people call, narcissistic sovereignty,” Harold Cook, a non-governmental organization representative at the U.N. and a fellow with the American Psychological Association, told CNSNews.com.



Dr. Jennifer Kasper, fellow at American Academy of Pediatrics (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)But critics say national self-determination is at the heart of why the treaty should not be ratified

For the liberals, loss of sovereignty includes laws we live under that were NOT created by our states or congress but by external authorities.

“And child protection and advocacy watchdog groups have been able to react to those reports by doing their own shadow reporting to the international committee on the rights of the child,” Davidson added.

But Austin Ruse, president of the conservative United Nations watchdog group Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, told CNSNews.com that the conventions reflect a worldview that rejects the idea of sovereign nation

Ok They could make spanking illegal. Go to jail
Could make homeschool illegal.
Church could be illegal.
You could create a crime if your child wanted to go to the movie and you drug them to church.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Conten...x?rsrcid=39799



child means every human under 18 except for the unborn child. They are no more than a blood clot.

Obviously this allows the UN inspectors to intrude on a home and determine if we are meeting their standards. They may say a kid has the right to tv and a computor. What about porn?

Privacy. Their own bedroom.

Obviously they give lip service to parental rights. One is custody. They claim a parent has custodial rights. Can't see they have aever taken a Muslim kid home to his American mom when the dad goes to Iraq and kidnaps his kid.

If a child opposed homeschooling, the parents authority is over ruled.

curfew? That is soooo controlling.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org...pub_detail.asp

a parent could be convicted of illegal search and seizure if they snooped in the kids room and found contraband. "Privacy rights"