Protect against Nazi America

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by John3v36, Aug 29, 2011.

  1. John3v36

    John3v36
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    Adolf Hitler once said:

    “He Alone, Who owns the youth, gain the future”
    Adolf Hitler

    http://www.parentalrightsus.org is trying to get a constitutionally protected through the proposed Parental Rights Amendment which would state:

    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.​


    I see this as a Good thing. Check out the video :smilewinkgrin:

    http://www.parentalrightsus.org/Overruled/
     
  2. John3v36

    John3v36
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    0
    I forgot to say many Americans are losing their parental right and do not even know it. There is nothing in the construction to protect us as parent so it is left up to judges to define what parents right are. To me this is a scary thing:tear:
     
  3. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,187
    Likes Received:
    611
    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.


    Oh great, another solution looking for a problem to solve.
     
  4. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    What? There is a current UN treaty that abrogates the rights of parents, that the US has not yet signed. If signed, the government would essentially have final say in regards to your children. One lady actually had her children taken away (due to the treaties implementation in Europe), because she told her 5 year old that she was sinful, and needed Christ. It was determined to be mental and psychological abuse.

    The treaty, among other things, denies the rights of parents to instruct their children on religious matters contrary to the child's wishes, and forbids the parent from pushing things like "gender identity" on them.
     
  5. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,187
    Likes Received:
    611
    Do you have a link to information on this treaty?
     
  6. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess he is still looking for the link! :tear:
     
  7. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
  8. John3v36

    John3v36
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    0
  9. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,187
    Likes Received:
    611
    Not a word in there about a treaty. There was plenty of references to encouraging each individual state (nation) to pass laws consistent with the findings of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child.

    The Committee is encouraged that a growing number of States are taking
    appropriate legislative and other measures to assert children’s right to respect for their human dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law.


    and

    The Committee has welcomed the fact that, in many States, the
    Convention or its principles have been incorporated into domestic law.



    Article 7, part 2 says: States Parties shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their national law

    Not a word about a treaty. In fact, the U.N. is asking each nation to develop their own sovereign laws that would follow the recommendation of the committee's findings and conclusions.


    Article 14, part 1: States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.


    Furthermore, I saw nothing about gender identity. So the fact is that there is no treaty and there is nothing about gender identity. So, as I said about the original post, a solution in search of a problem.

    BTW, I loathe the United Nations, but let's get our facts straight.
     
  10. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0

    ok?

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21041.html

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/25/boxer-seeks-ratify-treaty-erode-rights#ixzz1WTF4TtUX

    http://westernfrontamerica.com/2009/03/02/treaty-childrens-rights-outweigh-parental-rights/

    http://www.cnsnews.com/node/70584

    http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/washingtontimes/200608280.asp
     
  11. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do have my facts straight. You need to think a little more, and investigate a little more, before you post reactionary responses. I understand that, because I am much the same way, but it makes you look foolish.

    First, most "teaties" are called "conventions." The terms are synonymous.

    Definition of "Convention"

    a : agreement, contract b : an agreement between states for regulation of matters affecting all of them c : a compact between opposing commanders especially concerning prisoner exchange or armistice d : a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct by convention

    Second, if you will read the text of the article, you will notice that it does not agree with what you say. Nations that ratify the Convention are bound to observe it (http://www.crin.org/resources/treaties/CRC.asp?catName=International+Treatie). They are bound to not only actively work to conform their laws to the provisions of the treaty, (with yearly reports on progress), but they become immediately subject to international courts.

    Understand, this is not coming from a conspiracy theory website, but from the UN website itself. I have spent a lot of time researching this particular subject, and I encourage you to do the same, instead of simply reacting with googled bits of inaccurate information. Again, this is a vital issue that people need to understand!
     
  12. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    Anyone who is politically aware already knows about this. It is 20 years old. Not sure why this person is so uninfomred.
     
  13. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,187
    Likes Received:
    611
    At first glance it looked like one of the many inaccurate emails that make the rounds.

    That is an awesome typo! Thanks for the chuckle.

    Yes, convention can mean an agreement between nations. Good point, I totally blew by that.

    Where is the part about the international courts? I didn't see any enforcement mechanism in the stuff that you posted. All I saw in the documents were the ability for other U.N. entities, like the World Health Org. or UNESCO (for example) to sit in on committee meetings.

    And I want to know more.
     
  14. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,187
    Likes Received:
    611
    Mandym, thanks for the excerpts and the links. I consider myself to be somewhat well informed but I'd never heard of this. I have kids so it's an important issue for me.
     
  15. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    More of the typical overreacting paranoia from the right. :sleep:
     
  16. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard. This is not a partisan issue. There are quite a few blue dogs blowing the trumpet on this as well. This is a SERIOUS threat to our parental rights.

    But you fight the war like all stupid liberals do, "Oh, guys, there is nothing to worry about. Just relax. You won't even miss those rights..."
     
  17. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is interesting and needs attention. I do have concern about section 2 posted. It sounds like it leaves the door wide open that they are trying to close. Can you elaborate?
     
  18. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing is going to change as long as most parents use the public schools for free babysitting.
     
  19. Havensdad

    Havensdad
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    True: we need to get rid of public schools, and the taxes that fund them.
     
  20. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    MOST ridiculous EVER? Not partisan, yet “stupid liberals”?

    Your hyperbole and ad hominems prove my point. Thanks.
     
    #20 Magnetic Poles, Sep 3, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 3, 2011

Share This Page

Loading...