Kyle and her husband moved to Brookfield in 1986. She became active in local politics and started blogging in 2004. Her focus is primarily on local issues but often includes state and national topics, too. Kyle looks at things from the taxpayers' perspective in a creative, yet down to earth way, addressing them from a practical point of view.
Ever notice how you can never totally kill a bad idea? No matter how many people contact their representatives requesting a NO vote, and the measure is defeated, the bad idea never goes away. It may lie dormant for awhile, but almost always it comes back.
Well, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is one of those bad ideas set to make a comeback. Do you remember it? It was a U.N. measure seemingly designed to protect children. In reality, it took children out of the jurisdiction of their parents and constitution of their home country and put them under the authority of the United Nations! Because of the outpouring of negative calls to our Senators, the measure failed to pass back in 1989.
This [UNCRC, also called CRC] poses a serious threat both to parental rights and to U.S. sovereignty, as the UNCRC dictates not only that the federal government must intrude into the family sphere to an unprecedented degree, but also how the federal government is to monitor and govern the actions of our families. Parental rights would be replaced by "the best interests of the child" as defined, ultimately, by an international committee of 18 people in Switzerland.
The Convention was adopted by the UN in 1989. It has since been signed or ratified by 193 countries in the WORLD and every member of the United Nations, EXCEPT the United States and Somalia. Treaties or Conventions are ratified by the Senate. A 2/3 majority is required for passage. Senator Barbara Boxer is now pushing for the UNCRC to be ratified. (FoxNews, Feb. 25, 2009)
Due to the recent election, however, there are rumblings from Capitol Hill that there will be an effort to seek ratification of the CRC during the next congressional cycle. Hillary Rodham Clinton is a strong supporter of the treaty, and as secretary of state, would have direct control over the submission of treaties to the Senate.
Why should passage of the CRC be of concern? It likely would have a negative impact on domestic law and practice in the United States. Article VI of our Constitution makes treaties—and remember, conventions are viewed as treaties—“the supreme law of the land.” The CRC would be treated as superior to laws in every state regarding the parent-child relationship. This would include issues regarding education, health care, family discipline, the child’s role in family decision-making, and a host of other subjects.
What can you do? ParentalRights.org is urging the adoption of a Parental Rights Amendment: "The only solution to the attack on the child-parent relationship is the Parental Rights Amendment -- securing the rights of parents to raise their children."
So you can sign the petiton.
ParentalRights.org is also urging that we keep the issue in the public eye. They are asking that concerned Americans email conservative talk show host Glenn Beck and ask he talk about the UNCRC. Email him at firstname.lastname@example.org and request that he cover the Parental Rights Amendment, talk about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and invite Michel Farris on his show. (Michael Farris is both the President of Parental Rights and Chairman of HSLDA, a homeschool legal defense organization.)
You could also contact our Senators Herb Kohl (202) 224-5653 and Russ Feingold (202) 224-5323. I know, I get tired of calling and contacting too, but the alternative is too unthinkable for me to just sit back and let things fly under the radar to passage.