Like I said agree or disagree that is your right. I have no problem with it. I have done my homework on this.
I have looked at others who adopted this and went through some of the cases that came up. I can't post all the links.
Here is one last thing on it. You won't hear anymore from me on it. I just want people to beware.
Here it is in Text there are so many loop holes in it that even the best parent could have a child taken away from them. It is not just abouut homeschool its about parent rights.
A child with Christian parents can come home from school and legally prictice witch craft or devil wishop and there is nothing they could do. Just read it.
Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!! You need to
or
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child reflects the vision of the UN to take rights away from parents, thereby allowing the government to raise your children while indoctrinating them into the new "global consciousness". The convention describes children as a member of a family AND the community, placing much of the responsibility for their well being on the state rather than the parents. In Article 17 the Convention states that "States Parties recognize the important function performed by the mass media and shall ensure that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of national and international sources, especially those aimed at the promotion of his or her social, spiritual and moral well-being and physical and mental health". So, who dictates what material is diverse enough, what spiritual information they should have access to, and what promotes moral well being? You guessed it. The United Nations and the Convention decide what is best for your child.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child was drafted over the course of 10 years (1979 - 1989) by representatives of a variety of religions and cultures along with members of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and several NGO's. Like all human rights treaties, the Convention on the Rights of the Child had first to be approved, or adopted, by the United Nations General Assembly. On 20 November 1989, the governments represented at the General Assembly agreed to adopt the Convention into international law. It has since been ratified by 191 countries with only the United States and Somalia abstaining. It should be of concern to all Americans, however, that the U.S. has signaled its intent to ratify the treaty by formally signing the Convention. Why should you be concerned? The treaty obligates all those countries who ratify it to abide by a not so small list of mandates that effectively take the job of raising your children away from you and hand it over to the government. The Convention puts it this way:
"Prior to or shortly after ratifying the Convention on the Rights of the Child, States are required to bring their national legislation into line with its provisions – except where the national standards are already higher. In this way, child rights standards are no longer merely an aspiration but, rather, are nationally binding on States. Ratification also makes States publicly and internationally accountable for their actions through the process in which States report on the Convention's implementation. At the centre of the monitoring process is the Committee on the Rights of the Child, an independent, elected (elected by themselves) committee whose members are of "high moral standing" and are experts in the field of human rights."
Below are some of these mandates that states will be required to report on:
Article 6
1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life.
Interestingly, this does not apply to unborn children.
Article 5
States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention.
This article starts out fine, but throws in a qualifier that negates the respect of parents rights and duties. States shall respect the rights and duties of parents as long as direction and guidance complies with the rights of the child recognized in the present convention. And, who decides what the evolving capacities of the child are? Appropriate direction and guidance of your child is no longer up to the parents, it must comply with the rights of the child recognized by the Convention. Article 2
1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child's or his or her parent's or legal guardian's race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
What this is basically saying is that the rights of a child as set forth in the Convention override the rights of the child as perceived by the parents based on their religion or opinions. If the rights the Convention feels are due your child conflict with your religious beliefs, political opinions or cultural background, too bad.
Article 4
States Parties shall undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention. With regard to economic, social and cultural rights, States Parties shall undertake such measures to the maximum extent of their available resources and, where needed, within the framework of international co-operation.
Still pushing the globalization agenda and the elimination of national sovereignty, this would put our economic, social and cultural rights in the hands of the United Nations and the "international community".
Article 6
2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child.
Once again the STATE becomes responsible for the development of your child.
Article 12
1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.
Perhaps an example of this law in action would be good. Suppose you find out your school is requiring that their teachers teach a class on homosexuality where lifestyles are discussed in detail and the students are taught that this is normal, acceptable behavior (this is actually happening in the US). Little Johny comes home and tells mom or dad that they want to participate in the class. Mom and Dad feel this class goes against the beliefs and values they are trying to instill in their developing child and has no place in the school curriculum. Too bad. The state feels Johny is old enough to make his own decisions on matters of sexual preference and has a right to express his own views on the matter.
Article 13
1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice.
Article 14
1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
After the class meditation exercise, Johny draws a picture of a satanic symbol and a picture of the earth, and writes below it "we are all God and the Earth is our Mother". Little Johny brings the art project home and shows Mom and Dad. Even though Mom and Dad are Christian and are trying to teach their child that Jesus Christ is his savior and created the earth, Johny has a right to his own beliefs and a right to express them however he wants to. After all teacher told him he did.Article 14
2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.
What parental direction does the Convention feel is consistent with the evolving capacities of the child?
Article 14
3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
This one should scare all of us. Freedom of religion becomes freedom of religion as long as the convention does not determine your beliefs are a threat to public safety, order, health, morals, or the freedoms of others. We've all seen the beginnings of this line of thinking in our government. If someone finds your Christianity offensive you are somehow infringing upon that person's rights and are expected to hide the fact that you're Christian.
Article 17
States Parties shall:
(a) Encourage the mass media to disseminate information and material of social and cultural benefit to the child and in accordance with the spirit of article 29;
The state and the media team up to raise our children.
Article 27
1. States Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development.
What does the convention consider an adequate standard of living for the child's spiritual, moral and social development?
Article 29
1. States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to:
(a) The development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential;
(b) The development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
There you have it in a nutshell. The state is responsible for making sure your child develops a respect for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. Remember when it was pretty much accepted that parents were responsible for teaching their children the principles they believed were best for them?
This treaty just emphasizes the importance of Christians getting more involved in government. We all need to be aware of the legislation that is passing through our government bodies and make sure our voice is heard. It is in the best interest of our children to be pro-active in our fight to raise them as Christians while teaching them the morals and principles of the BIBLE not the principles of the United Nations Charter.Have a good day but before you give in to it, please research what cases other country's have done that adopted this. How did the courts intervene in family affairs after they adopted this.
Home
Pages: 1
If you have children or grandchildren read this ! (Read 1059 times)
