It’s the latest threat to parents’ rights that no one knows about–and yesterday, the Senate moved one step closer to making it the law of the land. Like most U.N. treaties, this one sounds harmless enough.
But make no mistake–its innocuous name, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), masks a cunning attack on parental authority, unborn life, and U.S. sovereignty. Of course, this is a favorite strategy of liberal administrations: using treaties to get radical policies through the country’s backdoor. In this instance, it would bring our nation even closer to President Obama’s apparent goal of putting America under global governance.
As Phyllis Schafly points out, the U.S. already enacted the strongest piece of disabilities legislation in the world. This idea that the U.N. “can provide more benefits or protections for persons with disabilities than the U.S. is bizarre,” she writes in an excellent column that debunks the need for such a treaty. “The United States always treats individuals, able or disabled, rich or poor, innocent or guilty, better than any nation.” Democrats argue that it would help the rest of the world “catch up” to our standards. But, as Sen. Jim DeMint and others have made clear, the U.S. doesn’t need to sign away its rights to provide leadership in that area.
While this is a noble cause that embodies the American ethic–treating people with dignity and respect–it gives the U.N. a profound stake in U.S. law and the rights of people across the country. Specifically, the CRPD takes aim at parents, declaring that an international body–not moms and dads–will be the ultimate authority on issues like education. The treaty slips in phrases like “best interest of the child,” which, as Sen. Rick Santorum pointed out with me on last week’s radio show, are “red alert alarm words.” They mean that government officials or courts will be in the position of deciding what’s in your child’s best interest–not you. Under CRPD, the government would supersede parents in setting course plans for both gifted and special needs kids. The Homeschool Legal Defense Association is concerned–and rightly so. It maintains that this Convention signals a dramatic turnaround in parental rights.
And, of course, it wouldn’t be a U.N. proposal if it didn’t include a backdoor to greater abortion access. “The feminists saw to it that this treaty about disabilities includes language in Article 25 that requires signatories to ‘provide persons with disabilities… free or affordable health care,” Phyllis notes, “including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and population-based health programs.’”