I have been against parents being held responsible for the actions of their children for a very long time. I’m starting to rethink that stance. Violence in schools is just a symptom of our society. The symptom is surfacing in younger children. In my day, everyone in the Nation knew about Kent State. You didn’t have to explain what happened, or who was involved, or what it was about. You just said, “Kent State,” and everyone knew what you meant. (If you don’t, do an internet search on Kent State + Violence, and see what you get.)
Today, if you say Columbine High School, everyone knows what that was all about. Not so many know about Pearl High School and the other schools where shooting occurred. But, we all know about youth violence. At Columbine, the authorities found video tapes and all kinds of violent-type paraphernalia that any observant parent would have asked questions about if they had cared what their kids were up to behind closed bedroom doors.
What if…
What if, the parents had said, “I do not care about your privacy. It is your safety that I am concerned about… your health, your mind, your Spiritual growth.” Do children have a right to privacy? To take a bath, yes. To surf the internet, no way! To develop fight videos, to purchase or steal guns, to draw pictures of frightening things… these are symptoms of disturbed minds and a parent has every right under God and this nation to know what their kids are up to. If you consider what kinds of violence kids are exposed to these days from X-Box games to cop shows to forensic shows, is it any wonder that children grow up to think that it is okay to solve their problems with violence. The survival of the fittest was part of my science class, but it was also tempered with Jesus’ teachings. I have discovered that after I watch a show with violence, I have a reaction to some situations with anger or violent urgings. It may have something to do with menopause, but my thinking leans more toward the exposure to violence.
I believe that if some parents were held responsible for their children’s actions… even put on trial for those actions, I believe we would see more responsible parents. It is the parent’s responsibility to raise their children to be responsible adults adhering to societal norms rather than handling problems with violence. Violence as a solution is unacceptable, yet, this is exactly what more and more people are turning to in order to overcome obstacles.
I know there are some children that are so rebellious they are uncontrollable. There are ways to handle those. Where the buck actually stops is at the parents’ feet and how they raise their children. If the parent lacks self-control, then that is what the child learns. It is time to put more focus on the family unit and less interest on acquiring bigger/better everything. But if the United Nations has its way, then parents will lose their right of responsibly rearing their own child.
Back in 1995 the United States signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children which stipulates some quite radical rights including the undermining of Home Schooling your child. This “treaty” undermines families by “giving” children certain radical rights such as (my friend Julianne Bell condensed this for me):
These new “fundamental” rights would include “the right to privacy,” “the right to freedom of thought and association,” and the right to “freedom of expression.” Such presumptions subvert the authority of parents to exercise important responsibilities toward their children. Under the UN Convention, parental responsibility exists only in so far as parents are willing to further the independent choices of the child. Severe Limitations Placed on the Parents’ Right to Train Their Children–
Under Article 13, any attempts to prevent their children from interacting with material parents deem unacceptable is forbidden. Children are vested with a “freedom of expression” right, which is virtually absolute. No allowance is made for parental guidance. Section 1 declares a child’s right to “seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child’s choice.”
In Article 14, children are guaranteed “ freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” Children have a legal right to object to all religious training. Alternatively, children may assert their right against parental objection to participate in the occult.
Article 15 declares “the right of the child to freedom of association.” Parents could be prevented from forbidding their child to associate with people deemed to be objectionable companions. Under Article 15, children could claim a “fundamental” right to join gangs, cults, and racist organizations over parental objection.
The Convention Would Entrench the Right of Teenagers to Abort Their Babies
Under Article 16, the “right to privacy” is granted to children. This UN sanctioned “privacy” would seemingly establish as the child’s right to obtain an abortion without parental notice, the right to purchase and use contraceptives, and the right to pornography in the home.
Barack Obama has publically stated that the U.S. not ratifying this convention is “shameful” and has promised to investigate it. What is so frightening is that this document has some definite conflicts with our own Constitution. Which will win out? How can parents be responsible if they lose their right to be responsible?
That isn’t all of the bad news. The U.N. has seen fit to write an educational curriculum on sex education for public schools for ages 5-18. I talk about this report on my blog and the full report of the push for sex education for 5 year olds and older can be found here. We are losing our freedoms by the inches, not by the miles. When will we wake up and feel the shackles?
Be First to Comment