The U.N. adopted the Convention on the Rights of the Child on Nov. 20, 1989. By Sept. 2, 1990, 20 nations signed on to enforce the treaty. Currently, with the exception of the United States and Somalia, 193 nations have signed on to enforce it.
Nations that ratify U.N. treaties are bound to adhere to them by international law.
The convention established an 18-member panel to oversee children’s rights in nations that are part of the treaty. If approved by the Senate, the United States would fall under the jurisdiction of this panel...
“It submits our federal laws, our national laws to this treaty,” [Senator] DeMint told CNSNews.com. “And the fact is that we don’t know exactly how it’s going to run, but we know how bureaucracy works. Once a precedent is established and we have yielded control, we know that it will continue to grow. So the precedent is almost worse than the immediate details.”
DeMint also said that the treaty is superfluous because there are laws already that safeguard abused children in the United States...
While DeMint is in the forefront of opposition to the convention, liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is leading the charge for its adoption.
During the Senate confirmation hearing of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, held in January of 2009, Boxer told Rice the treaty would protect "the most vulnerable people of society."
"Children deserve basic human rights,” Boxer said at the time, “and the convention protects children's rights by setting some standards here so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected."
Boxer also labeled the fact that only the United States and Somalia are non-participants to the treaty as a “shame.”
Boxer has urged the Obama administration to review the treaty for the purpose of adopting it. The United States is already a part of two optional provisions in the treaty, namely relating to child prostitution and child soldiers. Boxer, however, is pushing for full participation in the treaty.
Senator Boxer thinks that kids don't have basic human rights in America.
International treaties: yet another reason to repeal the 17th Amendment.
No comments:
Post a Comment