My general thoughts that I am placing here so I won't have to keep retyping it, let me know what you think, are as follows:
---------
Parental Rights should be the steeple of child-custody disputes, but because an invasive, intrusive, and otherwise subjective standard for custody determinations has been allowed, parental rights remain under attack regardless to gender and not just on the international front lines. After reviewing Farnsworth v. Farnsworth the Court found, “a court cannot overlook or disregard that the best interests standard is subject to the overriding recognition that the relationship between parent and child is constitutionally protected.” Parental Rights are being set aside for a ambiguous and subjective notion called "the best interests standard" contrary to common sense and partly because people are not focusing on that god-given superior Natural right. In fact, because of the relaxed effort on making parental rights the most important issue, it allows the most fundamental and natural right to be whittled down in divorce, custody, child protective services, medical notification/versus parental notification, access to school records, home schooling, and more. These group of lobbies are a growing number, because government is "upsetting the balance of government authority versus parental authority" replacing governmental perferences over parental determination. Something that seems to be slipping the minds of organizations everywhere.
The purpose of the proposed amendment is much greater than just the treaty. In fact, it will affect many areas of concern in domestic law as well, but more importantly again it brings the focus to parental rights being protected. This will also give way to raising the standard of parental rights instead of continuing the slide and then crying foul that we don't have equal parenting rights. Equal parenting rights being a minor issue to the superior parental rights issue, because we need to at least recognize a right to be able to be reconcile to equality in an adversarial proceeding. Right now, people have succumbed to the propaganda of the BIC fictitious "standard."
We invited Phyllis Schlafly of Eagle Forum as well as other key conservative groups to speak on these issues, ironically Nancy Schaefer is part of the Georgia Eagle Forum, and they are both in full support of US Rep. Hoekstra's upcoming amendment. I too, am behind this amendment 100%. Phyllis also agrees with the points regarding Single Issue Lobbying Organizations versus Multi Issue Lobbying Organizations getting the job done. Any SILO is easy to come under attack from opposition and should consider merging, supporting, or supplementing MILO efforts, especially where economic support is weak in specific SILO areas. I am focusing efforts on as many of the MILOs that come together on this one federal issue, because it is the first of three that will be introduced this year and will gain the support of some of the largest women's conservative groups and more, because this is no longer a gender issue.
If referencing the "gender and marital status" do you mean "without regard to gender and marital status," I think that would just be used to attract glbt lobbies, which doesn't interest any of the major conservative groups. That would have to be carefully clarified, and probably not in a public forum until the language was set.
I strongly support the efforts of Nancy Schaeffer, Phyllis Schlafly, US Representative Pete Hoekstra, the Home School Legal Defense Association, and many others in both the domestic and international aspects of the Parental Rights Amendment. It gives us something strong to talk to the media about, to educate families about, and to implement a base policy that "Parental Rights Should Be Respected and Protected By All." Of course that means parents, government, and more should respect, and the government to enforce equal rights, which will take the courts out of micromanaging and revenue generating and put them back into the role of independent while limiting their direct involvement in the family. This is step one to other key legislation that will bring us closer to EQUAL parenting where two parents both are demanding their time to direct the care, education, and upbringing of their own children.
While I agree that the United Nations CRC is checkmate, I believe the Parental Rights Amendment is much much larger than the International issue, including child protective services, and many other domestic intrusion areas. Just as our parental rights have been whittled, we too shall reverse the damage by whittling back at them their authority to minimize the importance of family and the relationships between both parents and their child(ren).
No comments:
Post a Comment