[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

If You're Trying To Lose Weight But Gaining Belly Fat, Watch Insulin

Arabica Coffee Prices Soar As Analyst Warns of "Weather Disasters" Risk Denting Global Production

Candace Owens: : I Know What Happened at the Hamptons (Ackman confronted Charlie Kirk)

Illegal Alien Drunk Driver Mows Down, Kills 16-Year-Old Girl Who Rejected His Lewd Advances

STOP Drinking These 5 Coffees – They’re Quietly DESTROYING Your Gut & Hormones

This Works Better Than Ozempic for Belly Fat

Cinnamon reduces fat

How long do health influencers live? Episode 1 of 3.

'Armed Queers' Marxist Revolutionaries Under Investigation For Possible Foreknowledge Of Kirk's Assassination Plot

Who Killed Charlie Kirk? the Case Against Israel

Sen. Grassley announces a whistleblower has exposed the FBI program “Arctic Frost” for targeting 92 Republican groups

Keto, Ivermectin, & Fenbendazole: New Cancer Treatment Protocol Gains Momentum

Bill Ackman 'Hammered' Charlie Kirk in August 'Intervention' for Platforming Israel Critics

"I've Never Experienced Crime Of This Magnitude Before": 20-Year Veteran Austrian Police Spox

The UK is F*CKED, and the people have had enough

No place for hate apeech

America and Israel both told Qatar to allow Hamas to stay in their country

Video | Robert Kennedy brings down the house.

Owner releases video of Trump banner ripping, shooting in WNC

Cash Jordan: Looters ‘Forcibly Evict’ Millionaires… as California’s “NO ARRESTS” Policy BACKFIRES

Dallas Motel Horror: Immigrant Machete Killer Caught

America has been infiltrated and occupied Netanyahu 1980


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Threat to Parents' Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child
Source: townhall.com
URL Source: http://townhall.com/columnists/Mary ... r_issue_than_rights_of_a_child
Published: May 26, 2010
Author: Marybeth Hicks
Post Date: 2010-05-26 09:06:24 by Eric Stratton
Keywords: None
Views: 1139
Comments: 132

Threat to Parents' Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child
Marybeth Hicks
Wednesday, May 26, 2010

If you’re a parent, you’re probably too busy doing the day-to-day work of raising your children to worry about an international treaty that could actually undermine your authority over them.

But if you’ve ever insisted that your teenager drag himself out of bed on a Sunday morning to attend church with the family, or required him to find a part-time job to pay for the increase in your car insurance, or – heaven forbid – if you’ve ever spanked a young child for an act of willful disobedience, there are folks who’d like to override your parental judgment.

Folks like President Obama, in fact.

The issue of parental rights is at the heart of the ongoing debate over the US’s failure to ratify the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Mr. Obama thinks it’s a travesty that the US and Somalia – a country not known as a beacon of human rights – are the only two nations that haven’t ratified this treaty. Not only does he support its intrusions into our national sovereignty on behalf of children, he’s openly embarrassed to be on the short list with Somalia.

Up to now, it’s been a worried American homeschool community that most vocally opposes the CRC. That’s because the treaty clearly places responsibility for the education of children in the hands of the federal government. Such a mandate would certainly threaten the freedom of states to allow, and of parents to choose, homeschooling as an option to educate their children.

But it’s not just homeschooling parents who ought to be nervous about the CRC. We all should because the language of the treaty – which would supersede all American law other than the Constitution – radically changes the authority structure between parents, children and the state. In short, in line after line, it applies the standard of “the best interests of the child” to determine what’s permissible and what isn’t.

For example, the treaty creates "the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion." So if your child doesn’t want to go to a religious school, the law would favor his preference, not your desire to instill your faith.

It prohibits "arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy," which means you’d better not snoop in your son’s pockets while sorting the laundry. This could literally be illegal, and too bad if you find something to set off your parental alarm.

In fact, in Scotland, a CRC nation, a pamphlet for Scottish children explaining how they are helped by the treaty says, “In Scotland, the law recognises that your parents should normally be the people who care for you, if it’s the best thing for you.”

That’s very different from a provision that might say, “You have the right to the protection and care of your parents and can only be removed from your family if you are the victim of abuse or neglect.” The reason it doesn’t read this way is because that’s not what the CRC intends.

And who decides what’s “the best thing”? Take a guess.

It makes sense that the US stands nearly alone in refusing to ratify this treaty, since we live in the safest, most prosperous, most desirable country in which to be a child.

The CRC makes sense in places where girls can be sold into marriage at age 10, or where children are routinely victims of the sex trades, or of child labor abuse.

But in the US, the only logical reason to sign the CRC is to expand, through that new “international order” the president mentioned this past weekend, the role of the federal government into the daily lives and decisions of American parents and families.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) has introduced S.R. 519, opposing ratification of the CRC. He hopes to find 34 co-sponsors and thereby signal to the president that there’s no need to send the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent since it wouldn’t pass. This is the end-run play; the game winner is a Parental Rights Amendment to the Constitution.

It’s a good time to call a Senator or two and encourage them to join in co-sponsoring Sen. DeMint’s resolution.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 14.

#1. To: Eric Stratton (#0)

or – heaven forbid – if you’ve ever spanked a young child for an act of willful disobedience, there are folks who’d like to override your parental judgment.

Assaulting kids is not within the proper realm of "parental judgment" for any being more advanced than the chimps.

If the best or only option one can come up with is to use ones overwhelming physical advantage to hurt ones child - then one is a failed parent who is unfit to have custody of anyone.

Patriot Henry  posted on  2010-05-26   12:11:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Patriot Henry (#1)

If the best or only option one can come up with is to use ones overwhelming physical advantage to hurt ones child - then one is a failed parent who is unfit to have custody of anyone.

That's insane. You know full well that spanking isn't about inflict injury, it is to establish societal norms. Often times the only way to deal with a two-year-old is a slap on the hand and immediate denouement. Outlawing common sense empowers tyrants.

Dakmar  posted on  2010-05-26   21:09:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Dakmar (#3)

That's insane. You know full well that spanking isn't about inflict injury, it is to establish societal norms. Often times the only way to deal with a two-year-old is a slap on the hand and immediate denouement. Outlawing common sense empowers tyrants.

Spanking is about inflicting pain. Using pain as a negative reinforcement method on a child is a means befitting sociopathic Pavlovian social engineers and barbaric brutes.

If the only or best means available to you to communicate and teach a 2 year old is brute force - then you have failed and the child has not.

Patriot Henry  posted on  2010-06-04   12:30:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Patriot Henry (#4)

A simple slap on the hand is not brute force, it's a slap on the hand and serves more as a warning than some kind of torturous infliction of pain. It's never to be administered such that it causes severe tragic pain, but instead as a warning that the parent isn't kidding or playing games.

While I agree that one should normally refrain from violence with a child, and should always try techniques not based in violence, there are times when the hand needs slapped away in order to prevent a greater harm. If the kid is trying to touch a hot motorcycle pipe, and I keep saying no, and he insists, I might let him touch it briefly assuming it's not *that* hot. Experience is the best teacher in those situations. Afterwards we can talk about things like "dad knows certain things can hurt you, you need to listen when he says not to touch something".

If the kid is reaching into a boiling pot of water, and I'm screaming no as I run to stop him, and he continues with a smile on his face (as a 4 year old testing you is wont to do), I will in fact slap his hand once I reach him, assuming he hasn't taken the plunge. There is a point where you need stronger reinforcement than words, and a 4 year old doesn't take to reason immediately and always tries to push boundaries. If they don't understand a motorcycle pipe is hot, I'm ok with letting them learn through experience under the stipulations above. Boiling water on the other hand can cause some severe damage that the tyke's mind just can't grasp at that stage in his development, and he needs negative reinforcement when reasoning or even yelling don't seem to get through and he's about to cause serious perhaps permanent physical damage.

Once you've discovered, as a parent, that kids are always pushing boundaries, you learn to set boundaries. Once you've discovered, as a parent, that kids don't play by reason and logic like you thought they would before you had children, your views adjusts accordingly. Theory, as it turns out, is only right some of the time in regards to child rearing techniques, and half the theory out there is written by people with no actual experience parenting.

Me, I've only slapped my boy's hand one time in his life (he's 13 going on 14 now) and my daughter's one time as well (she's 10 soon 11). That's all it took, and both incidents were of the boiling water variety. All other tests/pushing/misdeeds were handled without. But damned if I'm going to let my kids disfigure themselves or worse just to stay in line with some inane theory.

I do think that a lot of parents take a bit of sadistic pleasure in being the Dominant Overlord and don't set boundaries for *themselves* on these things, which is where I think people like you draw conclusions that all hand slapping is somehow barbaric. Keep in mind though that blanket condemnations of activities like this, with no experience backing them up on your behalf, don't resonate with people who actually are in the process of raising kids.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2010-06-04   14:43:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: SonOfLiberty (#7)

It's never to be administered such that it causes severe tragic pain, but instead as a warning that the parent isn't kidding or playing games.

With enough money, time, and effort I could put together a million American parents who hit their kids who have a combined total of intelligence and sense that is not equal to half of your own.

Once you've discovered, as a parent, that kids don't play by reason and logic like you thought they would before you had children, your views adjusts accordingly.

I played by reason and logic. I realize now that I am a natural born freak.

I do think that a lot of parents take a bit of sadistic pleasure in being the Dominant Overlord and don't set boundaries for *themselves* on these things, which is where I think people like you draw conclusions that all hand slapping is somehow barbaric.

I wasn't referring to defensive hand slapping. I was referring to the parents who brutally abuse their kids well within the bounds of the law.

So many parents are idiotic, insane, incompetent, irrational, and otherwise incapable of using force in a rational manner that it makes no sense to authorize them to use force as they wish upon their children.

Patriot Henry  posted on  2010-06-04   23:16:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 14.

        There are no replies to Comment # 14.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 14.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]