|
Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Education » Reviews » Parental Rights Amendment » User review

Parental Rights

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would empower parents and preserve their rights, and defeat U.S. ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

< read all 1 reviews

A much needed move to protect parents' constitutional rights.

  • Jun 22, 2009
Rating:
+4
I was never into politics. I do vote though, despite the fact I don't believe things are as they seem and especially not as they are portrayed in mainstream media. I've been reviewing all this baby gear, delicious food, fun stuff... But when something's brewing in the White House that directly concerns my child and me as a parent, I tune in.

The first time I heard about the Parental Rights Amendment, I brushed it aside in a way because I had no time to delve into the specifics, I read the simple overview - I agreed with it and signed the petition that will go to Congress. Only later I realized the implications of not passing this Amendment and doing nothing in face of the coming ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (I'll refer to it as CRC from here on). It will only be a matter of time because Obama is for it (nothing against Obama himself, we all know he does not make the decisions on his own).

Some thoughts on CRC: First of all, I did not know what the CRC is and what that would mean if it was ratified. At first glance it seems like a very positive piece of legislation, or whatever you want to call it. It does have positive aspects like the right to adequate standard of living, protection from all forms of violence, and family reunification. What bothers me though is that many of the articles indirectly imply a complete shift of raising children from the hands of parents into the hands of the government. This smells (actually reeks) like something completely unconstitutional. As a matter of fact, sort of stinks like socialism.

Take for example article nine of CRC. It states that children have the right to live with their parents unless it is bad for them. So who decides what is bad for the children? The government? I am not referring to cases of child abuse here, this is entirely different. What if the government decides that it is bad for the child to live with his/her parents because they happen to be religious? Do you see what I am getting at? Now it is completely in the hands of the government to decide whether your child can live with you or not, even if the basis for it would be something irrelevant like disagreeing with government policies or having different beliefs that you do not compromise on. This is just one of many questionable articles of the CRC.

I don't want the government to decide when (possibly at the age of 4?!) and how to teach sex education to my children, I can handle it, thanks. Neither do I want the government monitoring every decision I make as a parent by appointing their own 'guardian' to my children at birth. I do not want the privacy of my child violated by making his/her medical records available to all teachers, physicians, and social workers without my consent. All of the above scenarios are real in countries that have ratified the CRC.

Why I think the Parental Rights Amendment is A Better Option: The Parental Rights Amendment in my opinion is the only measure at this time that can be taken to prevent the CRC unconstitutional infringement on the rights of parents nationwide. I find it baffling that supporters of the CRC refer to Parental Rights Amendment supporters as 'political organizations' when in fact most supporters are just educators and parents like you and I. CRC supporters also do not cite any sources on their website unlike the Parental Rights website where specific examples and sources are cited for every claim they make.

I don't know, I might be wrong, but I believe most Americans would not want international law governing them. Shouldn't the United States, each State individually in particular, have the authority to make their own laws concerning children? I see how this could benefit countries where children are truly opressed, persecuted for their beliefs, or do not have adequate means to survive. The questions is, who benefits from imposing the CRC on American families?

The Parental Rights Amendment to the Constitution would 'set in stone' that it is the parents, not the government, that decide on the education of their children. It would ensure that 'the best interest of the child' is not in reality the best interest of the government. Children are the future of this country, of course the government will grasp at any chance of forming them to be abiding, productive citizens who do not question the role of big government. As George Washington once said "Government is not reason, nor eloquence. It is force. And like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master." So true!

These quotes resound with the reason we need the Parental Rights Amendment:

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error."
-- Robert H. Jackson

"Freedom is not something that anybody can be given; freedom is something people take and people are as free as they want to be."
-- James Baldwin

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."
-- John Quincy Adams

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
-- Benjamin Franklin

'Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances, with any portion of the foreign world - as far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it."
-- George Washington

It is unfortunate though that most parents have no clue about this and it is highly likely that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child will be ratified in the very near future. My family imigrated to this country for freedom, but little by little it is turning into something that resembles the Soviet Union we left behind. It was during that reign that millions of people  - human rights activists, those who disagreed with the government, religious leaders, land owners, poets, writers, intellectuals, peasants, were sent to Gulag camps. Most of them perished and many were there without trial. 

It has been a very long time since either major political party represented the people. The Parental Rights Amendment supporters are neither Democrats nor Republicans, they are simply Americans. At the same time nothing is black and white anymore and it is really hard to see past all the various pieces of legislation to know what things are in reality.

Although the best move to counteract the CRC would be to simply uphold the Constitution, in which by the way the ability to regulate the rights of parents is not an enumerated power granted to the federal government, it is now too late to do that. The U.N CRC has been signed and is on its way to be ratified. Now the only option is the Parental Rights Amendment. 

Well, I am no lawyer, so if you are and you can clear things up for me even more please post your comments! I know many people will disagree with my views  - but I am interested in what you have to say :)

What did you think of this review?

Helpful
12
Thought-Provoking
10
Fun to Read
4
Well-Organized
6
Post a Comment
March 23, 2010
great review....I heard a snippet about the CRC last year and was so appalled at the example that they used. It was about religion, a 13 year old told his teacher that he was being abused by his parents becuase they took him to church with him twice a week. The teacher reported the parents it went to court and the child won, he doens't have to attend but once a week now. But he was taken from his family in the mean time while it was figured out. Great review....I agree and enjoyed reading it. Thank you
March 23, 2010
Thanks Tina :) I subscribe to their newsletter and often get similar cases from Europe where the CRC is implemented. Each one is more appalling than the latter. It will be a sad day if the CRC is ratified in the US, by the looks of it that's where it is heading. Thanks for the comment!
 
October 11, 2009
Excellent review of a mighty important topic. i find myself in complete agreement with nearly all of your points.
October 12, 2009
Thank you for reading the review and for the comment Paul!
 
June 22, 2009
No one, not even a parent, has the right to abuse a child, whether emotionally, sexually or physically. However, I do think that a lot of parental rights have been taken away unfairly. Spanking, for instance. I had my little hand swatted many times, and later on I had my little bottom swatted as well. I quickly learned what transgressions were serious enough to merit these swattings, and I learned to avoid them. I never, however, was abused in any way, shape or form. I was disciplined, and I was disciplined with love. I may not have understood then, but now, I realize that my parents loved me enough to discipline me, and that discipline is a form of love. Except for abuse or neglect, it is my humble opinion that our government should simply stay the hell out of how parents raise a family. I like the Parental Rights Amendment, but we both know that our lawmakers will completely miss the point and find ways to punish parents for punishing their children, and create children who will grow up without discipline. After all, it's easier for government to control those without discipline because they usually are not well educated enough to know when they are being taken advantage of. I hope this passes, but I am a bitter old man and I"m sure that our wonderful congress and senate will find some way to make raising children even more difficult that it is now.
June 23, 2009
Thanks for your comment John! I agree with you. It is unfortunate that often disciplining in a loving way is mistaken for child abuse. At the same time it is true that parents may discipline out of anger, not love, which is wrong. The U.N. CRC unfortunately is against any physical discipline. I can see how the next generations of children will grow up without any discipline. They should start building more prisons now ;)
June 23, 2009
It was odd for me. Once it was established that my parents would spank, they had to spank less and less simply because I knew they would. I did the same with my kids, and I'm now doing it with my granddaughter. I have swatted her little hand, and I have swatted her little bottom. She knows that I will, so I no longer really have to. When all else fails, physical discipline (NOT abuse) is sometimes necessary. If it keeps my kids and my granddaughter out of jail, I will happily spank them now simply because I do love them enough to go to any lengths to teach them. You sound like a good mother yourself. One rare thing I do agree with Obama on is that we badly need good mothers and fathers. They are the backbone of the future.
 
1
About the reviewer
Anastasia B ()
Ranked #21
I am a woman, a wife, a mother, a daughter, a sister, an aunt, a cousin, a friend, a Christ follower, an Interior Designer, a blog author, a cook, an artist, an eco-conscious consumer, a nature lover, … more
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

You
EcoMama
Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this government

Wiki

A constitutional amendment that will ensure that the courts of our nation protect the fundamental right of parents to raise their children. It will override international law that seeks to undermine the parental role. As the only complete solution to the danger confronting the child-parent relationship, the Parental Rights Amendment will place current Supreme Court doctrine protecting parental rights into the explicit text of the Constitution. 

SECTION 1

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

SECTION 2
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.

SECTION 3
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.

Why do we need an Amendment?

What is the threat to parental rights?

What is the solution?

What is the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child?

Parental Rights Amendment FAQ

Latest news on the Parental Rights Amendment

view wiki

Details

© 2014 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
()
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since
reviews
comments
ratings
questions
compliments
lists