Is U.S. sovereignty up for sale?

Barack Hussein Obama and his traitorous administration is preparing to sell the sovereignty of the United States for a bigger presence of the U.S. on the United Nations Human Rights Council. This deal does NOT include any input from We the People, and it has alarmed officials who have been working to protect the rights of American citizens, specifically parental rights that have traditionally been recognized throughout this nation's history, but are already being slowly diminished.

About eighty years ago, the Supreme Court declared that "The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations." However, a survey conducted last year of state and federal appellate court rulings found that the vast majority of the court decisions refused to acknowledge traditional parental rights as being fundamental rights.

In his bid to secure a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, which is an intergovernmental body made up of 47 member states, the Obama camp has submitted a series of 'Commitments and Pledges' declaring their loyalty and "deep commitment" to the U.N. At this time, the Council has no real legal authority and only offers opinions.The Obama administration is all about photo-ops, and they are willing to sell out U.S. sovereignty for a seat on a council that has no legal authority.

The U.N. Council sponsors the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and if it is approved by Congress and signed into law by Obama, it will supersede the laws of all 50 states on children and parents.

According to the Parental Rights website, the Convention on the Rights of the Child mandates the following:

1.) Parents will no longer be able to administer "reasonable" spankings to their children.

2.) A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.

3.) Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.

4.) The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision of every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.

5.) A child's "right to be heard" would allow him/her to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

6.) According to the existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense then it does on child welfare.

7.) Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.

8.) Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been ruled to be out of compliance with the CRC.

9.) Allowing parents the right to opt their children out of sex education has been ruled to be out of compliance with the CRC.

10.) Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortion, without parental knowledge or consent.

In other words, parents will be nothing more then care givers while the state will be the actual parent. Parents will be no longer entitled to the presumption that they act in the best interest of their children, giving way to governmental decisions that would trump anything a parent will seek for his or her child.