You already know who in the government loves your child more than you do: no one.
And you know which judge in our country would be more diligent than you are to make the very best decision for your child: there isn’t one.
That is exactly why you support the Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and why you oppose the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). By establishing the “best interest of the child” legal standard, the CRC would place government officials and judges in the role of second-guessing the decisions you make for your child.
And that’s just not going to work.
Consider “Girl” Bjarkardottir of Iceland, whose story was recently featured at NBCNews.com.
Her parents didn’t name her “Girl.” They named her “Blaer.” Unfortunately, no one involved at the time realized the name was not on the government-approved list of girls' names. When the error was discovered, she had to forego her own name and use the Icelandic word for “girl” instead.
“Blaer” is Icelandic for “breeze,” and according to the Icelandic Naming Committee, it is a perfectly acceptable name – but only for a male.
Under the CRC, Iceland has an obligation “to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being…and, to this end, shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures…. In all actions … the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” (CRC, Article 3) Apparently, the Icelandic government believes its Naming Committee is a part of fulfilling this responsibility.
And the Naming Committee believes girls need to be protected from bearing the name “Blaer.”
More @ Parental Rights
No comments:
Post a Comment