As If We Didn’t Have Enough Meddling From International Busybodies
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child must be a good thing, right? After all it’s for The Children™? Apparently not. It seems that even though we never ratified this abomination, some people think it still applies to us. If it is customary international law, I predict they’ll need an Army, not a village, to implement this in the U.S.
Mean Mr. Mustard 2.0: Teach Your Children Well
It would be just merely disheartening if this was confined to European shores, but consider the following:
Last month Michael Farris, the chairman of the American Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), warned that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child could make homeschooling illegal in the U.S., even though the US Senate has never ratified this Convention.
According to some activist judges the UN Convention is “customary international law. […] The fact that virtually every other nation in the world has adopted it has made it part of customary international law, and it means that it should be considered part of American jurisprudence.”
Provincial mouth-breather fear-mongering, you say? I wouldn’t be so sure. I doubt there’s a majority-making sentiment in favor of something this radical, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t some very prominent members of the judiciary who lament that fact and would not hestitate to sign on if they thought it was possible. For instance, I’m fairly confident that Ginsburg sees things that way. While in public pronouncements and opinions her rhetoric about the force of international law tends to be somewhat vague, in more intimate settings she has said that the US really has no choice but to accede to standards precisely like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
I’m not sure how strong the sentiments are amongst the other justices who made up the Roper majority. I’m not sure that Kennedy would go that far, but hell, when you’re willing to cite the Supreme Judicial Counsil of Zimbabwe (or whatever the hell it was) as a source for ruling on American constitutional questions, all bets are off.
As per usual, when children are mentioned by this kind, it’s an attempt to limit your autonomy as a parent. Read the rest.