DANGERS  OF
U.N. TREATY AND THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD
submitted by Kim Olszewski
This is a compilation from various sources.
Please refer to footnotes regarding the information contained.

ALSO: Please note that these are the apparent Visible Dangers.  Please see
Upload DANGER.UN2 from John H. regarding the Invisible Orchestrators
more than likely behind the push for this treaty.
----------------------------------------------------------------

TREATIES ARE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND
        Acts of Congress are the Supreme Law of the land only when made in pursuance of the Constitution, while treaties are declared to be so when made under the authority of the United States.S  Treaties would create obligations which supersede Federal and state law, invalidating laws pertaining to education, the family, etc. which conflict with the treaty(1).

 WE NEED TO LOOK AT ATTEMPTS ALREADY MADE TO LIMIT THE POWER OF TREATIES.
        Calling Article VI, section 2, the Achilles heel of the Constitution, the Senate Judiciary Commitee recommended the Bricker Amendment, a constitutional amendment which stated: A treaty which conflicts with the Constitution shall not be of any force or effect...A treaty shall become effective as internal law in the United States only through legislation which would be valid in the absence of the treaty.  This amendment was rejected as has every other legislative attempt to limit the scope of treaty power(2).

OUR CURRENT ADMINISTRATIONUS POSITION ON THIS TREATY.
        The ChildrenUs Defense Fund is now pushing to get this treaty signed and adopted.  Since Hillary Clinton was chair of CDF from 1986-1991, and CDFUs new chair is HillaryUs close friend, Marian Wright Edelman, we can anticipate aggressive effort by the Administration on behalf of this treaty(3).

WHY A TREATY ON THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD?
        This treaty is being promoted as a we must protect our children from abuses measure, so whatUs the controversy anyway??  The promoters understand very well that a spoonful of sugar... will help them pass this usurpation of parental rights and responsibilities.
        The Family Research Council puts it into perspective well. Across the globe, millions of children face starvation, upheaval from wars and ethnic conflict, incarceration, and disease.  Even in the United States many children have unequal opportunities, suffer poverty and homelessness, and are exploited by drugs and prostitution.  Why not support a treaty that requires our nation to eliminate these social scourges?...The short answer is that we do not need to undertake an international obligation to improve our childrenUs welfare (4).
        This treaty purposes to protect the rights of the child-but against whom??  ThatUs the $64,000 question, and itUs hard to come up with any answer other than against parents, states Phyllis Schafly (5).
        In a newsletter by Citizens for Excellence in Education, in my local area, the commentators state:   This treaty reeks of communism..we need to understand that the U.N. takes a different approach to human rights than the historical tradition of the United States.....In America, we already have proper protection for children from harmful influences, under authority of their parents.  Conversely, the Convention actually provides protection of children from their parents.  Without parental protection, to whom is the child vulnerable?  To the State.  It was Hitler who said, Let me control the textbooks and I will control Germany (6).  This threatens the very sovereignty of the United States.  We will be nothing more than another communist country under the scrutiny and control of the State (7).

Now, lets look at some of the Articles and provisions of this very controversial treaty.

SUMMARY OF THE ARTICLES OF THE CONVENTION (8)
        Article 3:   In all actions concerning children, the courts, social service workers, and bureaucrats are empowered to regulate families based on their subjective determination of the best interest of the child.  This shifts the responsibility of parental judgement and decision making from the family to the State (and ultimately the United Nations (9)).
        Article 4:   Signatory Nations are bound to undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures, for the implementation of the rights of the Convention.  In fact, the U.S. would be required to undertake measures to the maximum extent of available resources..within the framework of international cooperation in order to restructure society (10).
        Article 7:   All children must be immediately registered after birth, to ensure State and U.N. control over their development.
        Article 13:   Parents would be subject to prosecution for any attempt to prevent their children from interaction with Pornography, rock music, or television.  Little children are vested with a freedom of expression right that is virtually absolute.   NO allowance is made for parental guidance.
        Article 14:   Children are guaranteed freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.  They can object to all religious training.  They can assert their right to participate in occult or contrary services.
        Article 15:   The right of the child to freedom of association.  If taken seriously, parents could be prevented from forbidding their child from associating with people deemed to be objectionable companions.  Children could claim this right and join gangs, cults, racist organizations and associate with drug addicts over parental objections.  Parents rights and responsibilities are not mentioned.
        Article 16:   the child would have a virtually absolute right of privacy enforced at law against all others, including parents.   Abortion without consent, homosexual conduct, the right to view pornography-all protected under this right.
        Article 17:  The international media is declared the agent for safeguarding the character of children around the world.
        Article 18:   Calls on the state to be co-parent by rendering appropriate assistance to parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child rearing responsibilities and shall ensure the development of institutions, facilities and services for the care of children.
Encourages two-income families by granting children the right to child-care facilities run and subsidized by the state.
        Article 19:   Mandates the creation of an intensive bureaucracy for the purpose of identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up of parents who, in violation of the childUs rights, treat their children negligently.
        Article 24:   The governments of each signatory nation are required to provide the highest standard of health-care facilities, including family planning and education services.
        Article 26:  Parties must recognize the right of every child to benefit from social security and social insurance.
        Article 27:   Parents are required to implement conditions of living necessary for the childUs development.  These conditions of living are to derive from  State-determined standards for his physical, mental, spiritual, moral, and social development.
        Article 28:   Compulsory Education.  All nations are challenged to unite in the creation of an internationalist approach to education.  All school-age Americans would be encouraged to be part of the school-system.  The content of what must be taught to all children prescribed.  These include anti-American one-worldism, anti-family and anti-traditional values multi-culturalism, and environmentalism (what I believe is more earth-worship than anything).
        Article 29:   It is the goal of the State to direct the education of the people it governs toward the philosophy of the New World Order as enshrined in the charter of the United Nations.  This philosophy includes cultic, anti-Judeo/Christian values, authoritarianism and intolerance.
        Article 32:   The State is responsible to prevent children from providing labor which would interfere with the childUs education, or be harmful to the childUs Rhealth or physical, mental, spiritual, moral, or social development.  What? No household chores?
        Article 37:   Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have access to free legal counsel and access to the courts to make such a challenge.  Parents will have to pay new taxes to support the legal processes against themselves!!  (CanUt you just see the ACLU lawyers standing in line??)
        Article 43:   An international committee of ten experts is to be established to oversee the progress and implementation of the Treaty.  These experts will be chosen by secret ballot by all signatory nations.  There is no assurance that ANY American will even be on the committee!

CONGRESSMANUS OBSERVATIONS RE: THE DANGERS
        Representative Thomas J. BlileyUs, R-VA,(after the US Congress hurriedly passed resolutions urging President Bush to sign the convention) lone voice rose to urge caution and restraint (11):
        RI submit that this House has not taken the time to reflect upon the implications of the Convention and will be in for a tremendous shock when judges around the country start applying the Convention as the supreme law of the landS remarks in the House, Sept. 17, 1990.
        Rthe Convention represents a potential threat to our form of governmentS.
        RWill the Convention really solve the problems our children face? Is it merely an article of good intentions to make us feel good about ourselves? Or is it actually a potential threat to some of our most precious freedoms, civil liberties, and our form of government?S remarks in the House, Sept. 17, 1990.
        RHave we determined the impact that this Convention will have on our system of federalism? No.  Have we resolved in our minds its inherent conflicts with the U.S. Constitution? I think not.  Do we realize the great new powers Congress is taking away from the sovereign States, as well as giving up itself, to the judiciary?S remarks in the House, Sept. 17, 1990.

CONCLUSION
        I find it reprehensible that our Representatives would pass something so far-reaching without really reading it, or considering its ramifications!  My hope in sharing this information is to inform and encourage the readers to speak out against this dangerous and onerous treaty.
        I also encourage all of you to obtain the original documents that I derived this information from.  The amount of information was massive, and therefore much condensed.  Thank you for your time.

FOOTNOTES AND RESOURCES
(1)     The Teaching Home, Special Report, The Legal Impact of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, by Douglas W. Phillips, Director of Government Affairs, HSLDA, Jan/Feb 1994
(2)     Ibid.
(3)     Phyllis Schafly Report, March 1993 (In CIS Library)
(4)     Family Research Council, Unconventional Rights-Children and the United Nations, by Dr. James P. Lucier, former minority staff director for the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee
(5)     Ibid.
(6)     Dr. James Dobson and Gary L. Bauer, Children at Risk, p. 179
(7)     Citizens for Excellence in Education, The Trumpeter, Oct/Nov 1993
(8)     Article synopses were obtained and combined directly from the following sources (for space and time consideration, IUve cut some of the summaries down.  I encourage everyone to obtain copies of these original reports.)
        A) The Teaching Home, Special Report, The Legal Impact of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, by Douglas W. Phillips, Director of Government Affairs, HSLDA, Jan/Feb 1994
        B) Texas Eagle Forum, Torch Newsletter, Clinton Must Say NO to UN ChildrenUs Treaty by Phyllis Schafly, Jan 1994.
        C) Family Research Council, Unconventional Rights-Children and the United Nations, by Dr. James P. Lucier, former minority staff director for the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
(9)     Check out Article 43!
(10)    We HAVE to be talking a HUGE tax increase to support this and the other Articles. (See Article 37)
(11)    All quotes by Congressman Bliley obtained from Global Tyranny..Step by Step, by William F. Jasper, ch. 8- The UN Grab for Your Child.