Orion_Zorn |
May 20 2009, 12:04 PM
Post
#1
|
General Group: Silver VIP Member Posts: 4,173 AOM Replays: 21 Submissions: None Joined: 28-December 03 From: Upstate NY Member No.: 2,212 |
This is pretty interesting. Apparently, the UN is proposing a treaty that would protect children, not just advising other countries, but making international laws that supercede the laws of the country. From this site that dislikes it: * Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.11. * A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.12. * Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.13. * The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.14. * A child’s “right to be heard†would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.15. * According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.16. * Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.17. * Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.18. * Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.19. * Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.20. This is coming from a site that is against it. Even so I like a few of these. LOLZ no more Christian schools teaching kids stupidity without teaching the opposing view... It would be illage for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on a children's welfare? THis site must be wrong, there is NO way the US will ever be a part of this. Has anyone else heard about this? |
mG_Despair |
May 20 2009, 06:57 PM
Post
#2
|
Field-Marshal Group: Members Posts: 8,247 AOM Replays: 135 Submissions: None Joined: 9-June 04 Member No.: 6,543 |
The UN and what army? :whistling: It would be impossible to enforce without incredible power, and passing it without that power would just make the UN look like a laughing stock. Particularly when you consider the stances of almost all the various parts. This post has been edited by mG_Despair: May 20 2009, 07:02 PM |
LoSt Braidon |
May 20 2009, 07:46 PM
Post
#3
|
Major Group: AOEO Expert Posts: 1,259 AOM Replays: 0 Submissions: None Joined: 13-April 06 From: Gold Coast, AU Member No.: 36,395 |
WOW at those proposed laws or whatever you would call them.. anyways maybe the UN has just lost the plot do they not realise that they are not in any way shape or form a supreme authority above the state? |
Viper |
May 20 2009, 08:56 PM
Post
#4
|
ViperBot™ Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 22,033 AOM Replays: 0 Submissions: None Joined: 6-October 04 From: Adelaide, South Australia Member No.: 10,610 |
While the UN has no power to enforce this, here's what I think of each of these rulings. * Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.11. - ridiculous * A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.12. - also ridiculous * Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.13. - very sensible * The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.14. - incredibly stupid * A child’s “right to be heard†would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.15. - even more incredibly stupid * According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.16. - impracticable * Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.17. - very sensible * Christian schools that refuse to teach "alternative worldviews" and teach that Christianity is the only true religion "fly in the face of article 29" of the treaty.18. - children don't have the right to choose their school (parents control that right), so I think that this makes sense * Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.19. - this is something that parents should have the right to control * Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.20. - from a certain age only |
[A-USi]James246 |
May 21 2009, 03:50 AM
Post
#5
|
Brigadier Group: Members Posts: 2,034 AOM Replays: 0 Submissions: None Joined: 7-August 08 Member No.: 68,440 |
QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ May 21 2009, 04:04 AM) Wow. I think that parents should be able to do that. It's not like they are going to even patrol it, unless the kid speaks up. You need discipline, or otherwise kids growing up won't know what is right or wrong. QUOTE(Orion_Zorn @ May 21 2009, 04:04 AM) No, I hadn't until now. Thanks for bringing it up though :) Some of those are quite interesting, but some are just ridiculous. This post has been edited by [A-US]James246: May 21 2009, 03:51 AM |
Orion_Zorn |
May 21 2009, 09:43 AM
Post
#6
|
General Group: Silver VIP Member Posts: 4,173 AOM Replays: 21 Submissions: None Joined: 28-December 03 From: Upstate NY Member No.: 2,212 |
Like I said, the info was from a site that was against it. I should have done a little more research on it, possibly the website is exaggerating? Some of it seems a little ridiculous. |
mG_Despair |
May 21 2009, 11:30 PM
Post
#7
|
Field-Marshal Group: Members Posts: 8,247 AOM Replays: 135 Submissions: None Joined: 9-June 04 Member No.: 6,543 |
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm I attempted to read it, but fizzled out after not long. Article 28 is interesting though. Article 28 1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular: (a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all; (b) Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education, make them available and accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education and offering financial assistance in case of need; © Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means; (d) Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children; (e) Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates. 2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child's human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention. 3. States Parties shall promote and encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries. The most wealthy countries in the world can't do this. |
Orion_Zorn |
May 22 2009, 11:39 AM
Post
#8
|
General Group: Silver VIP Member Posts: 4,173 AOM Replays: 21 Submissions: None Joined: 28-December 03 From: Upstate NY Member No.: 2,212 |
QUOTE(mG_Despair @ May 21 2009, 11:30 PM) Which part? I would say that the wealthiest countries could do amazing things if we weren't so corrupt and allocated our resources better. (Although this is the first argument that leads towards socialism lol) |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 05:36 AM |
Site Designed and Coded Originally by Robo.
© MasterOfFreedom Sanctuary Networks LLC . All Rights Reserved.
© MasterOfFreedom Sanctuary Networks LLC . All Rights Reserved.