tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post1563251675407732848..comments2024-03-25T21:39:36.083-07:00Comments on Homeschool Distractions: UN Convention on the Rights of the ChildJoAnnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06843337250225596454noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-63773795210346385842020-12-17T08:14:56.271-08:002020-12-17T08:14:56.271-08:00Excellent post. I was checking constantly this blo...Excellent post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed! Extremely helpful information. I care<br />for such info much. I was seeking this particular information for a very long time. Thank you and best of luck.<br /><a href="http://www.spss-tutor.com/" rel="nofollow">SPSS Help<br /></a> Spss-Tutorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13699116489762358212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-91938815002538345682010-07-27T13:48:11.066-07:002010-07-27T13:48:11.066-07:00Unfortunately, anonymous, several countries ARE in...Unfortunately, anonymous, several countries ARE in fact limiting parental rights, including the right to educate our children, and claiming they have the right to do so because of this convention. Unfortunately, our fears are founded in the very real precedents that have already occurred. This isn't guesses as to what can happen; they are based on what has already happened.JoAnnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06843337250225596454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-58595284134440582152010-07-27T12:06:09.106-07:002010-07-27T12:06:09.106-07:00You are completely distorting and misunderstanding...You are completely distorting and misunderstanding the entire document. Obviously you also do not know that all ratifications tend to come with "reservations" and changes proposed based on existing domestic legislation and cultural issues. But if you and your readers really think this is a conspiracy, and if you seriously want to remain solely in the company of SOMALIA (which has only not ratified because it does not have a functioning government) by not agreeing to the rights of children not to be exploited, abused and neglected, well . . . it scares me you all have children, but explains why you don't want people seeing how you raise them. I say this as a child protection professional who has worked in the US, and countries at war all over the world for over 20 years. This country's arrogance as claiming it is "pro-freedom" is an embarrassment when we cannot join the international community on stating fundamental belief in children's rights. <br /><br />I thank the Prince of Centrax for the sensibility. And for JoAnn, the U.S. has ratified the ILO Convention 180 on Exploitative Child Labor. The CRC was the initial impetus for focusing on child rights 20 years ago. Subsequently, as it became the most widely ratified convention in history (except for the US and Somalia), specific conventions and protocols to the CRC have been developed to further deal with particular issues. But with the large number of Americans who do not want to be prevented from using corporal punishment, and paranoid homeschoolers who think they will be stopped (why is a mystery-- there is no basis in the CRC for eliminating homeschooling, unless it involves abuse or neglect), a statement of overall rights for children is blocked. Ironic, ain't it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-7343388168620998172010-07-02T12:49:04.975-07:002010-07-02T12:49:04.975-07:00I just reviewed the link http://childrightscampaig...I just reviewed the link http://childrightscampaign.org/crcindex.php?sNav=getinformed_snav.php&sDat=faqs_dat.php<br /><br />Truth #1 to Myth #1 states that the SCOTUS ruled that a treaty cannot be used to supersede the US Constitution. While this is true, in theory, with the number of progressives on the supreme court and the number of times they refer to laws of other nations in their rulings, I believe this is a slippery slope.<br /><br />Truth #2 to Myth #1. The last sentence states, "RUDs do not legally exempt the U.S. from adhering to a provision." This statement proves the Myth to be fact.<br /><br />Truth #4 to Myth #1. If this convention has no teeth for the U.N. to inforce. What is the reason to sign it? Whether you are for it or against it, it makes no sense to sign as it has no teeth.<br /><br />All Truths to Myth #3 again no teeth. What is the benefit of signing it?<br /><br />Truth #2 to Myth #3 states, "Article 5 states that Governments should respect the rights..." should is the key word here. The difference between should and shall is HUGE.<br /><br />This is as far as I am going for now. My biggest argument against signing it is that it does absolutely nothing, except the give the ability, over time, to erode United States sovereignty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-26177824034870405572010-05-05T19:04:37.242-07:002010-05-05T19:04:37.242-07:00http://childrightscampaign.org/crcindex.php?sNav=g...http://childrightscampaign.org/crcindex.php?sNav=getinformed_snav.php&sDat=faqs_dat.php<br /><br />i think you just need more research. read this. <br /><br />if this treaty is being used against homeschoolers, that is the fault of the nation's government, itself, not the treaty. Each government that has ratified, has done so with a set of provisions that they have agreed to. the governments of germany and england, therefore, have set their own laws of homeschooling based on their own interests. <br /><br />a treaty, by definition, cannot usurp our constitution.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-54887619978549794262010-03-29T17:16:59.763-07:002010-03-29T17:16:59.763-07:00Please excuse my late comment but I just stumbled ...Please excuse my late comment but I just stumbled upon this blog. There is something that needs to be cleared up... the Convention on the Rights of the Child is an international agreement which means that in order for there to be a "violation" the government needs to be the one doing the violating... not a parent. An individual cannot be tried on a human rights violation. If anything, this convention gives parents more power in protecting their children from abuses. The real reasons the US has signed but not ratified the Convention are the facts that we still allow children to sign up for war service, we still have states that allow for the death penalty for children and we do not provide adequate healthcare to all children- these are the big ones.Jenni O.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10796951215763014409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-74675681961855607202009-10-21T09:49:16.293-07:002009-10-21T09:49:16.293-07:00Justin,
I would need to know which claim you are a...Justin,<br />I would need to know which claim you are asking about. I did not make any specific claims, but rather asked a bunch of questions. What if what I believe is best for my child is not the same as what the "competent authority" believes? Does that mean I lose the right to choose for my own family and child? Yes, I believe it does. <br /><br />This convention is already being used as a vehicle for just that in some European countries. It was used to seize, by gunpoint, children of a homeschooling family in Germany. Homeschooling is illegal there as the government has determined that socialized public school is in the best interests of the child and government. The key words in that last sentence is "best interest of the child". Who decides what is in the child's best interest? In Germany, it is the government.<br /><br />It is currently threatening homeschoolers in the UK. They are working towards creating laws that give the authorities rights to access the home, talk to the children, determine if the child wants to homeschool or go to public school (so the state can force the parents to return the child to public school), choose curriculum that the parent must teach, etc. Does the state's authorities know better than the parent what is in the child's best interests? Have they raised that child since birth? Have they spent time determining what the child's learning style is and researched dozens of curriculum, trying several of them, to find out which one works the best for the child? Of course not! So, how is it that the state knows what's in the best interest of the child better than the parent? They don't. Yet, the UK is working towards passing these laws anyway. They don't care about the best interest of the child; they only care in maintaining control over the child's upbringing.<br /><br />If they can use the convention in this manner over there, what's to stop them from doing it here...especially when you realize that the US Constitution makes international treaties (ie. this convention)the supreme law of the land. This means if the convention is ratified, it would automatically override all state laws pertaining to family and children, transferring jurisdiction to Congress, which is required to follow the UN mandates. At that point, if the UN were to determine that public school is in the best interest of the child, our Congress would be obligated to enforce the public schooling of all children. If the UN determines that ____ discipline technique is against the best interests of the child, our Congress would be obligated to ensure it wasn't used here. Unless there is an amendment to our Constitution, this Convention and the "competent authorities" who decide how it is to be implemented, would be making all of our child and family laws for us.JoAnnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06843337250225596454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-42695209711890639562009-10-20T22:22:18.201-07:002009-10-20T22:22:18.201-07:00Sorry to post twice, but I'm curious about JoA...Sorry to post twice, but I'm curious about JoAnn's post. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?Justin Livihttp://facebook.com/justinlivinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-18538860294980289662009-10-20T22:20:04.394-07:002009-10-20T22:20:04.394-07:00The convention deals with basic rights of a child,...The convention deals with basic rights of a child, rights such as the right to life, basic freedoms such the right to not be forced into sexual slavery, etc. The convention is international, meaning the U.S. isn't passing any legislation, rather, the U.S. signing it would would signify U.S. leaders agreeing within the international community that they would not violate the rights of any children anywhere in the world. The convention is designed to protect children from being forced into workhouses and used as child-soldiers in places such Sierra Leone. I think the U.S. has been reluctant to sign it up until now, because U.S. corporate interests profit daily from underpaid child-labor overseas. Signing could potentially jeopardize some of those interests. I think that the U.S. signing could potentially greatly improve the lives of children all over the world.Justin Livihttp://facebook.com/justinlivinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-73133908147190407412009-07-11T07:28:02.443-07:002009-07-11T07:28:02.443-07:00Prince,
I agree, those issues should be dealt wi...Prince, <br /><br />I agree, those issues should be dealt with. I think the best way to deal with them is directly and specifically rather than using a sweeping, broad document that could be used to control just about anything. Let them make a treaty specifically about child slave labor!<br /><br />The other issue is that this specific treaty is ALWAYS BEING USED AGAINST HOMESCHOOLERS in Germany and England. It has already been proven that it is not just harmless legalese.JoAnnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06843337250225596454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-51447629688027066222009-07-11T02:54:40.953-07:002009-07-11T02:54:40.953-07:00I am a home schooling parent and believe that most...I am a home schooling parent and believe that most of your objections to these agreements are really objections to harmless legalese.<br />Children's rights need to be protected in the wider world, where some countries still have child slave labour, for heaven's sake!<br />In many places marriage is condoned before puberty!<br />So let's not throw out the babies with the bathwater. What's your opinion on other UN treaties, like the declaration of human rights?new illuminatihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16878597865373112468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-47560782186079656342009-06-25T07:50:44.339-07:002009-06-25T07:50:44.339-07:00I don't usally post twice in a row, but I just...I don't usally post twice in a row, but I just saw this - it's an article in the Examiner stating that homeschooling interests are flooding the phone lines of the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., expressing their dissatisfaction with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.<br /><br />Good to know that people are looking out for us.<br /><br />Click the link for the article - http://www.examiner.com/x-10042-Des-Moines-Homeschooling-Examiner~y2009m6d24-UN-ambassadors-phone-lines-crash-due-to-overwhelming-homeschool-lobbyProntoLessonhttp://www.prontolessons.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-35219070799140387862009-06-25T07:35:07.767-07:002009-06-25T07:35:07.767-07:00Great article -
It's tough enough to be vigil...Great article -<br /><br />It's tough enough to be vigilent in protecting our interests here at home...now we have this to contend with.<br /><br />I believe Sweden is already moving to make homeschooling illegal, citing its interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights.<br /><br />And coincidentally, UK just announced prior to Sweden's announcement that its moving to increase homeschooling regulations.<br /><br />With Education Secretary Duncan's remarks about wanting to officially compare U.S. education against international benchmarks, it worries me that homeschooling could get caught up in this, resulting in more regulations on homeschooling here.ProntoLessonshttp://www.prontolessons.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-12033608939772499882009-06-25T00:28:36.614-07:002009-06-25T00:28:36.614-07:00My question is: what is the supposed reason for ne...My question is: what is the supposed reason for needing this? Do we have a multitude of abused children whom the current Child Protective Service is not dealing with? I mean, for measures this extreme, you'd think the majority of children are being abused beyond belief. Yes, there are certainly alterior motives. This isn't about protecting children.Mommy to Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15050208707080904593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8004296142783931577.post-28356091872862213832009-06-24T20:40:32.264-07:002009-06-24T20:40:32.264-07:00I do not like this one bit. Thanks for bringing it...I do not like this one bit. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I believe that this will be used against homeschoolers. The government has gained too much control over our daily lives. It needs to be stopped. Time to start using our constitution once again.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12240113783462640605noreply@blogger.com