Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Parental Rights Amendment Has 71 Sponsors and Growing

by Mark Godbey
March 31, 2009

The growing parental rights movement in this country has taken on new life over the past few weeks with the inclusion of the millions of Non-custodial Parents into the Parentalrights.org cause.

Originally introduced in June 2008 by Rep. Pete Hoekstra R. of Michigan's 2nd District, H.J. Resolution 97 died in committee last year from lack of support from Congress, but more importantly from the public. The resolution only had 31 sponsors last year

"At a time when government at every level seems to encroach upon the ability of parents to choose the best for their children," Hoekstra writes on his website, "it is important to preserve parental rights into the Constitution," said Hoekstra in a prepared statement from his congressional website.

Congressman Hoekstra along with Republican Senator Tom DeMint, S.C. are set to re-introduce the resolution, today, this time with 71 supporters in United States Congress. The plan is to move forward to an eventual co-sponsorship with Democrats to amass 290 votes in the House; and 67 votes in the Senate, the number needed for passage onto the States. From there, the States have 7 years to ratify or reject the amendment.

The growing threat of the ratification of the United National Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) by the Obama Administration and the increased government interference that it directly implies is pushing the amendment to get serious this time.


From the parental rights website: "The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, often referred to as CRC or UNCRC, is an international convention setting out the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of children. Nations that ratify this international convention are bound to it by international law. Compliance is monitored by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child which is composed of members from countries around the world. Once a year, the Committee submits a report to the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly, which also hears a statement from the CRC Chair, and the Assembly adopts a Resolution on the Rights of the Child.

Governments of countries that have ratified the Convention are required to report to, and appear before, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child periodically to be examined on their progress with regards to the advancement of the implementation of the Convention and the status of child rights in their country. Their reports and the committee's written views and concerns are available on the committee's website. A notion which is supported by Senator Barbara Boxer D, CA pushing the treaty out of her committee for a Senate vote."

Also from the Parental Rights Organization website.

"Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC.

1. It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law. It is no mere statement of altruism.
2. Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers.
3. Children of other nations would not be impacted in any direct way by our ratification.
4. The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of our Supremacy Clause.
5. 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.
6. The Courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution.
10. 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.

Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC.

1. Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.
2. 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.
3. Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.
7. Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.
8. 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.
9. Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.
10. Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent. "

United States Parental Rights Amendment

On the other hand, US resolution is very simply stated:

The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing and education of their children is a fundamental right.

Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe upon this right without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.


No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

There is a growing collation of groups that support a Parental Rights Amendment, they include:

American Family Rights Association (AFRA)

Americans for Tax Reform

Children Need Both Parents

Children of God for Life

Christian Liberty Academy School System (CLASS)

Christian Medical and Dental Association

Citizens for Excellence in Education (CEE)

Citizens for Parental Rights

Concerned Women of America (CWA)

Dads Against Divorce Discrimination (DADD)

Defend the Family International

Eagle Forum

Families Best Interest, Inc.

The Fatherhood Coalition

Fathers' Rights Network

Focus on the Family Action

Get Your Justice Live (getyourjusticelive.com)

The Guardiannews.net

Gun Owners of America (GOA)

Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA)

Honk for Kids



Talk About Curing Autism

United Civil Rights Councils of America

Add to Technorati Favorites

No comments:

Post a Comment