Monday, November 22, 2010

ALERT: United Nations CEDAW: Open Assault On Everything We Believe In

In light of my recent research I have been doing lately on the pernicious United Nations, I received an ironically well-timed email  from a fellow blogger on a similar UN topic.  I thought it quite worthy of posting his article here as well accordingly.  ~ T. Paine

Guest Post by Spencer.  You can read Spencer at Books, Bones, Bricks, and Bullets

I need everyone's attention on this one, so please, listen up.

Sorry I'm late on this; I hope it isn't too late to call now. As of this afternoon, I was able to make my calls (one attendant even asked me before I got a word out, "Are you opposed to CEDAW?"), so it was at least undecided then.

It's called the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? Anti-women ideology is something I particularly hate; few things disgust me more. So might I be in favor of this international treaty? Should you be?

The answer is as easy as one word: NO! Let me tell you why; please bear with me. This is some of the most important information you've heard in a while.

First and foremost, you need to get informed on this issue, and fast. See this article here; please check it out, it's quick and informative.

Second, I have a copied-pasted email from PRO below (yes, the good folks at are making moves on this issue as well, due to its massive implications on all families everywhere); it has the calling information.

Third, if you aren't convinced yet, let me condense the issue for you. Or rather, let me allow Michael Farris to condense the issue for you, via an excerpt of the article.

The Preamble of the CEDAW treaty boldly proclaims: “A change in the traditional role of men as well as the role of women in society and in the family is needed to achieve full equality between men and women.”

That is not the only megalomaniacal goal of this treaty. Its Preamble also calls for a “new international economic order” and “general and complete disarmament” both of which are deemed necessary to “contribute to the attainment of full equality between men and women.”

It is a “modest” agenda. Restructuring the family. A worldwide socialist economy. Total disarmament. All neatly packaged in a handy little treaty on women’s rights.

The UN CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women)

A "complete disarmament" (this time, they actually came out and said it). A reversal of Biblical family life, a reversal of Biblical family roles. An enforced feminist and socialist agenda. All conducted from the oversight of the United Nations (which means the sacrifice of American sovereignty). Is this what you want?

If that doesn't convince you, then nothing will. I don't know the status of CEDAW as of Friday night/tonight, but perhaps some calls Monday morning are in order? (And how about some prayer, as well?)

After all, it's only everything that's at stake.

And here's the original PRO email, with accompanying calling information:
The United Nations’ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is being considered today in a Senate foreign relations sub-committee hearing. urges you to call your senators and instruct them to oppose this treaty.

Here is a link to Michael Farris’ paper regarding the dangers of CEDAW, in which he warns, “Feminist internationalists intend to use international law to coerce the restructuring of the institution of the family and the role of every man and every woman on the planet.”

Understand, this is not the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), of which we have been warning you for so long. Like that treaty, however, CEDAW seeks to establish U.N. authority over American domestic law, and to redefine forever the role and function of the family in American society. Like the CRC, CEDAW also contains obligations far beyond its beneficent title. And like the CRC, CEDAW is part of a net of international human rights treaties which strengthen and play off of each other, so that ratification of any one leads in part to the adoption of all the others.

For instance, the CRC’s aim to make “reproductive health services” an undeniable right of adolescent girls regardless of parental involvement would be realized just as securely through ratification of CEDAW as it would through ratification of the CRC.

Perhaps most dangerous, the CEDAW committee has claimed, just as the CRC committee has, that their convention is a “dynamic instrument,” and that the committee has the ability over time to clarify the broad obligations of the treaty with an increasing degree of specificity as they progress toward their own world-wide agenda.

While the ratification or defeat of CEDAW is not the primary focus of, we must acknowledge that its ratification would be damaging to parents in the United States, while its defeat would be a victory for ourselves and for our allies.

So please, take a moment and read Michael Farris’ article here.

Then, call your senator if he is on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Human Rights Law, or chairman Senator Durbin if yours is not. Urge them to oppose ratification of CEDAW and any other U.N. human rights treaty.

The members of the Subcommittee on Human Rights Law include:

Richard Durbin (IL), Chairman: (202) 224-2152
Russell Feingold (WI): (202) 224-5323
Benjamin Cardin (MD): (202) 224-4524
Chris Coons (DE): (202) 224-5042
Arlen Specter (PA): (202) 224-4254
Al Franken (MN): (202) 224-5641
Lindsey Graham (SC): (202) 224-5972

Senators Tom Coburn (OK) and John Cornyn (TX) are also on the subcommittee but do not need to be called, as they both oppose CEDAW already.


Michael Ramey
Director of Communications and Research

So please, take a moment to call on Monday (or, if you like, leave voicemail messages over the weekend). If you do call, then I thank you heartily, and I'd ask you to please let me know in the comments section. If you do not comment, I will have to assume that you did not call.

Also, I beg you all to please tell everyone you know about this, ASAP, via whatever method you choose (blogging, email, facebook, twitter, or anything else you use).

Let's cut off this viper's head, shall we?



Dave Splash said...

The right is so hostile toward women it is becoming pathological. Wow.

I know the right believes in all that women should be subordinate stuff, but it's 2010. You need to get over it. This is the same crowd that opposed giving women the right to vote and opposed the ERA Amendment.

T. Paine said...

Dave, the UN CEDAW is no more about women's rights than their Human Rights Council is about protecting humanity.

It is about delegitamizing and emasculating men while pursuing a feminist agenda with the kicker of trying to "disarm" signatory nations.

It is just one more step at world governance through social engineering.

No one on the right wants women treated as lesser people. They sure as heck don't want to take away their right to vote or work or any other such hysterical nonsense the left might use in their hyperbolic rhetoric, sir.

If the left were as "for" women's rights as they claim perhaps a few more folks would stand up and condemn some of the fundamentalist Islamic nations where women really are little more than property. Instead, the left thinks womens rights are all tied up with their "right" to abortion.

The Warrior said...

Thank you so much for publishing this here; I greatly appreciate your help with this! God bless you!

If the left were as "for" women's rights as they claim perhaps a few more folks would stand up and condemn some of the fundamentalist Islamic nations where women really are little more than property. Instead, the left thinks womens rights are all tied up with their "right" to abortion.

Great point! It often makes one wonder, why so pro-Islam, if they're so anti-woman?

Do you not even believe and/or practice your own professed doctrine?


T. Paine said...

Spencer, it comes down to the fact that most (not all though) progressives are more concerned with political ideology than the causes they profess to support.

That is why the National Organization of Women can stand by and say nothing while Sarah Palin is criticized for working in politics instead of at home with her kids and suffer every sort of vile verbal attack, while if you even think about limiting abortion, they are ready to march in protest.

Angie Simon said...

This posting uses scare tactics and false claims to distort the benefits of CEDAW. The truth is that CEDAW strengthens the United States as a global leader in standing up for women and girls. CEDAW is a landmark international agreement for human rights and women’s equality, and a blueprint for each country to make progress on eliminating discrimination against women. Presidents Reagan and Bush have ratified similar agreements on torture, genocide and race.

Many countries have overhauled their laws and policies on violence, rape and sex-trafficking based on CEDAW. In addition education, voting, inheritance and other policies have improved under CEDAW.

Almost all countries have ratified CEDAW except seven -- including the U.S., Sudan, Somalia, and Iran. We need to continue America’s proud bipartisan tradition of promoting and protecting human rights and ratify CEDAW now!

free0352 said...

Michele Bachman, Sarah Palin, Carly Fiorina, Sharon Angle, Christine O'Donell, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingram...

Republicans... those sexist bastards.

Historical Note. Susan B Anthony, leading activist in the 1900s for women's sufferage and abolitionist was... Republican... along with all the other abolitionists, temperence movement types, and supporters of sufferage.

Oponents? Democrats. AS always.

The Warrior said...

T. Paine: That's actually what I was hinting at.... :-P

Angie Simon: I don't see anything about rape or sex trafficking in this treaty. Why not just create our own laws (that would be, if said country didn't have any in the first place)? Do we need the UN to show the whole world the only acceptable way to behave? Thanks, I'll take the American way.