Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report


Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)

Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Order Books






20 years

August 5, 2002

     July 31 • Washington, DC—Give the Democrats control of the Senate for even a minute and you can give strong odds to the bookmakers that socialism disguised as "democratic rights" will be knocking on the door. And sometimes, the Democrats will reach deeply into the closet of the past to find the right liberal issue to champion. In this case, they reached back to 1980 and into the closet of ultra-liberal James Earl Carter to drag out the failed UN treaty, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women [CEDAW], that gives women supra rights over their male counterparts. Interestingly, one of the first nations in the world to sign CEDAW in 1980 was Afghanistan.
     As if they didn't have enough current problems to deal with, the Senate Democratic leadership (with one eye on snagging the woman's vote this November) dragged Carter's failed feminist treaty out of the closet and decided to give it another "go-round," where they could score political points one way or the other. If they could manage to get 67 votes and ratify the treaty and force it on George W. Bush's desk they would score a major victory with the feminists whether Bush signed it into law or vetoed it. If they managed to get only...say....50 votes, they could complain to the female electorate that they were bullish on women's rights but the GOP wanted to keep the woman shackled to the kitchen sink, barefoot and pregnant. Anyway you view it, the Democrats win.
     And, with Bush's popularity still hovering around 60% even after the beating he took from the liberal media scripted by Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt, which personally blaming Bush and Dick Cheney for Enron and MCI-Worldcom's financial woes, the Democrats needed something sticky enough to tar and feather the Bush-Cheney Administration.
     This appears to be the best thing the liberals could find since Bush has stolen not only most of the liberal's favorite issues from them but most of the Hispanic voters as well. At the moment, up to 167 liberal special interest feminist groups favor bringing CEDAW out of mothballs and throwing it out on the Senate floor like yesterday's smelly garbage for a recorded vote.
     Senator Joe Biden [D-DE], Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, announced on Tuesday that by a party-line vote of 12 to 7, the
Committee was sending the long-ago defeated Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women back to the floor for a vote by the full Senate. "It's long past time for the Senate to act," Biden said. "The treaty provides a framework of basic rights for women, such as right to equal opportunities in education, in employment and a right to equality before the law."
     In reality, women and ethnic minorities are already granted supra rights in the United States in the areas of education, employment and in competing for lucrative contracts with the federal government. The only class of people in the United States who are now denied equal opportunities under the law, and the only class of people denied the right to openly and fairly compete in the United States are middle-class white males. And, shocking as it may seem, the middle class white male is, and has been for decades, a minority class—although he remains unrecognized as such—throughout the world.
     Opponents of CEDAW argue that the utopian legal watchdogs exploit the deliberately vague language of the treaty to undermine the tenets of democracy in all of the 170 nations which have signed the Treaty. "This treaty represents a battering ram against free and democratic societies," Cecelia Royals of the National Institute of Womanhood, "and particularly against women with traditional values." The treaty promotes abortion as a means of population control almost to the point of mandating it, and promotes the use prostitution as a healthy means of achieving sexual gratification without the cumbersome risk of procreation. But moreover, the treaty requires every nation to provide an adequate platform for women seeking office by guaranteeing that women hold half of all elected offices in signatory nations. Denmark, which immediately complied with that requirement by amending its constitution, recently chastised Belgium (one of the power states in the European Union) for not complying with that requirement. In response, Belgium enacted a law that mandates that 50% of all elected positions in that nation be reserved for female candidates.
     Arguing that those forcing compliance of this treaty, and the treaty itself "...make a mockery of human rights," declared Connie Marshner of the American Catholic Council, an advocacy group aligned with Paul Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation. "Under CEDAW," Marshner said, "human rights becomes a scrap of politically correct rhetoric that means whatever the implementers of CEDAW want it to mean on any given day."
     Nancy Schaefer, founder of Family Concerns in Turnerville, Georgia, has been a UN watcher since the early 1990s, and was an attendee at the UN Conference on Human Rights in Beijing when Hillary Rodham Clinton, Timothy Wirth and several strident feminists attempted to resurrect CEDAW under a new name, wearing a new suit of politically correct red, white and blue flag-draped clothes to make it appear like an "American" idea (the same thing Franklin D. Roosevelt did in 1941 when he and Winston Churchill "remodeled" the failed League of Nations into the United Nations and successfully tricked the American people into believing that the UN was an American idea that would promote American ideals all over the world.
     Schaefer has been fighting not only the UN agendas which have come out of every UN global conference since the early 1990s, a battle that led to her current fight against Smart Growth and Rural Legacy programs that encourage State governments to use taxpayer dollars to "buy" public lands for the express purpose of denying the taxpayers access to that land once it is assumed by the State or by the federal government (which also uses our tax dollars to buy them).
     Senator Barbara Boxer, whose daughter is married is one of Hillary Clinton's brothers, voted to throw CEDAW on the floor of the Senate. Boxer insisted that the Convention "...has no enforcement power whatsoever..." and can only make recommendations to the signatory states. Boxer is either deliberately lying or she is a typical New Deal Democrat who never reads the bills she votes for, and hasn't taken the time to read the "fine print" in the Convention for the Elimination of All Discrimination Against Women. Defending CEDAW, Biden was quoted in the media as saying: "The treaty is a means to an end—a tool which strengthens the ability of the United States as well as women's advocates around the world to press nations to expand rights for women. We will not have to change any laws to become a party." Of course we won't have to change any laws since, according to the 16th century Law of the Nations, once the United States signs this treaty (which Jimmy Carter did in 1980 without authorization from the Democratically-controlled Senate) it becomes law. Under the Law of the Nations, international accords supersede the national laws of any nation. In other words, in theory, if the Senate ratifies CEDAW, the terms of that Accord supersede any State or federal law that would contradict the terms of that treaty.
     Under the Law of the Nations, once a "head-of-state" signs an international accord—even if the laws of that nation require confirmation by that nation's parliament or congress—it immediately becomes binding on that nation since the international arena does not recognize anyone other than the legal president, premier or prime minister. Further, according to the Law of the Nations, once an international accord is signed it cannot be refuted or abrogated by future heads of State of that nation.
     What that means is that the minute Jimmy Carter signed the Convention, it became a binding treaty on the United States just as Bill Clinton's signing
the Kyoto Protocol bound the United States to the UN Global Warming Treaty. That is likely the reason that Senator George Allen [R-VA] stated that the convention, despite lacking enforcement powers could be used for litigation purposes in this country. At the moment, the Convention is being used as the legal authority on discrimination against women in a civil lawsuit currently being conducted in Brazil.



Just Say No
Copyright 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved