I'm surprised that no mention has been made on the forum regarding a horrific constitutional referendum to be held November 10. Irish parents terrified over ‘state takeover of children’ in upcoming Referendum Peter Baklinski Wed Nov 07 18:42 EST Family IRELAND, November 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Irish parents have teamed together in a desperate attempt to fight what they say is a looming governmental usurpation of parental rights in the form of a referendum that, on the surface, professes to be about “protecting children.” Their message: “The referendum is a bad deal for Irish children.” Former MEP Kathy Sinnott, an outspoken member of Alliance of Parents against the State (APS), called the upcoming November 10 referendum “absolutely diabolical”. “The new wording [proposed for the Constitution] is actually giving children less protection,” she said. Critics of the referendum have focused mainly on wording in the amendment that allows state agents to remove children from the family and place them in care if they believe it is in the child’s “best interests.” The amendment also allows children to be adopted out to other families without parents’ consent. Sinnott said that Ireland already has a Constitution that “really protects the family, protects life, protects marriage.” But 20 years ago, she said, the Irish government quietly ratified the Unite Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child. The UN has now been “pushing the Irish people” to have a referendum to amend their Constitution so that it corresponds to the UN Convention. “The government thinks that people are ready to buy their propaganda that changing the Constitution is about protecting children. Of course this is nonsense, because our Constitution already very strongly protects children.” Sinnott said that all the referendum does is to strip parents of their God-given responsibilities over their children and to hand them over to the State. “Not only does the State take over parental authority, but all a parent has to do is ‘likely to fail’ in their responsibilities, as defined by the State, for the State to take control of the children.” “Everything, of course, is for the ‘best interest of the child’, which according to the UN treaty, is decided by the State.” Sinnott called the proposed amendment a “complete reversal of natural law”. “The reason why the family should have prior rights over children is because of the family bond, which is nature’s strategy for protecting children. This is the mother-child bond, the father-child bond, the mother-father bond, and the brother-sister bond,” she said. “This bond is the source of what is really in the ‘best interest’ of the child. The State can never have this bond. By injecting themselves as controlling shareholder of every family in this country, the State is reversing this natural order.” Sinnott said that with the wording of the Constitutional amendment being released just a few weeks ago, there has been no time for parents to mobilize effective resistance. “It has been a YES campaign from the beginning,” she said. “Everyone believes that in voting YES, they are protecting children, but they are really giving up their rights over their children.” Alliance of Parents against the State has compiled a list of 10 reasons to vote No in the Children’s Rights Referendum. According to this list, under the amended Constitution: • Parents will be reduced to caregivers of their children under the ratified Constitution • The State will be given the power to put children up for adoption, even against the will of the parents • The State will have the power to vaccinate every child in Ireland, if it sees that it is in a children’s best interest • The State will have the power to give birth control to children of any age, even if they are below the age of consent. Lord have Mercy! O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us! Our Lady of Knock, pray for Ireland!
Government agents get to decide the “best interests” of the children. That's scary terminology. Considering the fact that so many in the government here support abortion, practically ever sexual deviation known to man, and is growing more intolerant of the Catholic Church. As far fetched as it sounds, truly it's not much of a leap for government agents to decide that traditional Christianity warps children's minds and is a form of mental abuse. It will be okay to be the kind of Christian who believes homosexual is a healthy life style choice, abortion is perfectly acceptable way to get rid of an "inconvenient" baby, and who's morality is determined by the cultural trends of the day rather than Church teaching. Being the other kind of Christian, the old fashioned Catholic who refuses to bend like a reed in the storm of immorality and follows the compass of Church teaching, will make one an unfit parent and your children will be torn away by the state. I hope it never comes to this, but that Referendum seems to open the door to that exact scenario.
Oh, this is old news in the U.S. In the 90's, Hillary Clinton was the U.N. babe pushing this agenda. I printed out 1000 copies of the U.N. Children's RIGHTS Agenda and handed it out far and wide. I was furious! http://www.independentsentinel.com/2012/07/the-u-n-wants-the-rights-to-your-child-in-the-form-of-a-treaty/ ... The treaty mandates “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” and outlaws the “arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy,” intrudes on the family and strips parents of the power to raise their children without government interference. It takes the control of child rearing from parents. The UN’s Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation has decided that, “in a world affected by HIV and AIDS”, it is “imperative” to teach children as young as 5 about masturbation as well as “gender roles, stereotypes and gender-based violence”. By the time they’re 9 years old, they’ll learn about “positive and negative effects of ‘aphrodisiacs,” and wrestle with the ideas of “homophobia, transphobia and abuse of power.” At 12, they’ll learn the “reasons for” abortions — but they’ll already have known about their safety for three years. When they’re 15, they’ll be exposed to direct “advocacy to promote the right to and access to safe abortion.”… Read more here… One of the provisions bars anyone under 18 years of age to be imprisoned with adults. It will invalidate all state laws requiring teens over 16 accused of murder and other violent crimes to be tried and sentenced as adults. Forget state rights, what about our right to safety. It gives a slap on the wrist to violent, dangerous youths. It applies to all children under 18 and includes disabled children. Parental rights groups are deeply concerned that the government is meddling in even the simplest freedoms to raise their children as they see fit. “Whether you ground your kids for smoking marijuana, whether you take them to church, whether you let them go to junior prom, all of those things . . . will be the government’s decision,” said Michael Farris, president of ParentalRights.org. “It will affect every parent who’s told their children to do the dishes.”20 Things You Need to Know About the Treaty And I Warn You – It’s Big Brother [Parental Rights.org]: Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC: It is a treaty which creates binding rules of law. It is no mere statement of altruism. Its effect would be binding on American families, courts, and policy-makers. Children of other nations would not be impacted or helped in any direct way by our ratification. The CRC would automatically override almost all American laws on children and families because of the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI. The CRC has some elements that are self-executing, while others would require implementing legislation. Federal courts would have the power to determine which provisions were self-executing. The courts would have the power to directly enforce the provisions that are self-executing. Congress would have the power to directly legislate on all subjects necessary to comply with the treaty. This would constitute the most massive shift of power from the states to the federal government in American history. A committee of 18 experts from other nations, sitting in Geneva, has the authority to issue official interpretations of the treaty which are entitled to binding weight in American courts and legislatures. This effectively transfers ultimate authority for all policies in this area to this foreign committee. Under international law, the treaty overrides even our Constitution. Reservations, declarations, or understandings intended to modify our duty to comply with this treaty will be void if they are determined to be inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty. Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC: Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion. 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. 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. According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare. Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure. 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. Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC. Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent. Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children. 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. KEY CONCERNS FROM parental rights org: The “Best Interests of the Child” Article 3 of the CRC states that “in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” Thus, policies affecting children at all levels of society and government should have the child’s best interest as the primary concern.The problem for families occurs when this principle surfaces as a guiding principle for parents. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern as dictated by the state according to international law.It is a departure from American Law--The convention emphasized the “best interests” principle which is not aligned with American law... The convention supersedes the parents’ rights to the STATE This is Soviet style communism.It is a new level of government intrusion -Children are considered to have “evolving capacities” and cases will be brought before the courts for all ages of children since all will be viewed as evolving and age will play no role. Judges will have to set their own standards since the convention does not. So you will have the U.N. deciding the child’s best interests, cutting parents out completely. This presents an imminent danger to the American family and to our nations’ sovereignty over a sacred right to rear one’s own children. The only way to ensure the preservation of the child-parent relationship is through an an amendment to the constitution protecting parental rights. The time to secure the protection and preservation of the American family is now. Don’t wait until it’s too late. Sign the petition for the Parental Rights Amendment today.
The Supreme Court in Ireland ruled yesterday that the Irish government information campaign in the Children's Rights Referendum was not fair, partial or equal. Yet the election goes ahead even though the Court rules that the government was using propaganda. http://europeanlifenetwork.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/irsh-supreme-court-rules-that.html
It sounds like a communist regime . I remember reading an article it was by a Christian I think it was Pat Robertson 10 things I would do if I was the devil it was in the sixties he mentioned about children would rule their parents Among other things
Garabandal, Just talking here about the Supreme Court ruling.....was always voting no, but now would love to be able to vote no twice. FoundSoul. P.S. Say a Prayer that this referendum fails.
