The UN wants to dictate how parents raise kids

by Gramfan on February 24, 2013

in Australia, Gramfan (team member), United Nations

Menzies House: Further to Global Governance

Allan has been digging deeper among the complications of UN directives foisted upon gullible minions within major governments, through to local governments. Using “the best interests of the child” as a stalking horse, the gullible do acquiesce. GC.Ed.

AGENDA 21 & PARENTAL RIGHT

To ensure that there are sufficient up and coming supporters of the United Nations Global Governance agenda, the indoctrination of our children is of the utmost importance to that organization.  We already see erosion of national pride being actively pursued in schools and universities.

Socialist values are being encouraged as national pride takes a back seat to the wants of the ‘Global’ family.  The raising of our national flag is discouraged on the excuse that some within our failed multicultural society may be offended.  The singing of the National Anthem and the saying of prayers in schools has also been abandoned for the same reason.  Non-denominational religious teachings in schools has also suffered the same fate, and Christmas is being turned into Happy Holidays to placate the sensibilities of those who don’t now and never will belong in our society. The greatest insult to our national pride comes from a bureaucracy that has determined ANZAC Day to be divisive. That is laughable and a grave insult to all patriotic Australians.

The United Nations has created yet another convention, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, or CRC. Left-wing socialist governments are keen to turn this “convention” into a treaty because they know it is extremely difficult to extract one’s self from that situation even if they lose the next election.

The international treaty would create specific civil, economic, social and cultural rights for every child and claims that “the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.”  Those pushing for the introduction of the treaty say, “That while parents have primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child the UN’s CRC will ultimately determine whether parents’ decisions are in the best interest of the child.” While parents will have the financial responsibility of raising their children, the family home will simply become a boarding house for privately sponsored up and coming Global Governance drones.

According to those who have studied the CRC at length and in depth, the following are just some of the implication of its introduction:

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.  (We have already witnessed some of the inexplicably stupid decision made by “government workers” from Child Welfare agencies.  God help us and our children should they be given such unbounded totalitarian powers.)

A child’s “right to be heard” would allow any child to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

It would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than is does on children’s welfare.

Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.  (You would not be able to stop your child from going out when they liked, with whom they liked, to where they liked if the child determined it was for leisure.)

Teaching children about Christianity in schools would be deemed to be out of compliance with the CRC.

Allowing parent’s to opt their children out of sex education at any age would be deemed to be out of compliance with CRC.

Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

What this and other edicts mean is that a child will have every right (whim) fulfilled by the government and the development and direction of children will shift from parents to the government. The implications of that shift is that parents no longer have the traditional roles of either being in control of their children or have the right to direct their children. In short, the traditional family unit is completely destroyed and parent’s could be treated like criminals for making every-day decisions about their children’s lives.

The United States present administration, including Muslim sympathizer Obama and Kevin Rudd’s very good friend Hilary Clinton are very much in favour of the CRC and are pushing to have it ratified this year and make no mistake, our government will follow suit to remain in step with the US and fulfill what it sees as its obligations to the UN within the context of Agenda 21.

(Thanks to Global Report 2010 from which these comments were extracted)

Allan is retired from active RAAF duty. In civilian life he was a pilot and flight instructor.  He was also the commander of an Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol maritime rescue unit on the South Coast of NSW and senior officer for the Far South Coast.  He fights for a fair go for ex-servicemen and women and is a harsh critic of the government’s treatment of serving and ex-service personnel.


{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: