More grease on the slippery slope of "globalism" - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-02-2002, 02:14 PM   #1
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Discoteque's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hotter 'n' hell Texas: Dallas
Posts: 3,568
Local Time: 05:04 AM
More grease on the slippery slope of "globalism"

interesting and frightening.....could this be the beginning of the demise of the "traditional" family? If you feel strongly that this should not be passed, contact your Senator or Congressman!

Senate Voting on Controversial Worldwide Gender Treaty

By Paul Serrell
Congressional Correspondent
July 30, 2002

The plan is called CEDAW, which stands for the "Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women." WASHINGTON, D.C. A powerful Senate committee is scheduled to vote today on a plan that could radically change the roles of men and women in the U.S. The plan is called CEDAW, which stands for the "Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women."

Supporters of CEDAW say it would promote gender equality in all areas of society around the world. But critics warn of a brave, new world where traditional views on family and relationships would be wiped out.

CEDAW is a United Nations treaty that President Jimmy Carter signed back in 1980. But after all these years, it still cannot take effect unless two-thirds of the Senate votes to ratify it.

What CEDAW says is that "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."

Democratic senators like Joseph Biden and Barbara Boxer view CEDAW as a big step forward for women, especially in poor countries like Afghanistan.

But conservative Christian groups say although CEDAW sounds good, it isn't.

Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America said, "This CEDAW committee at the UN has told China to decriminalize prostitution, criticized Mexico for having quote a lack of access to easy and swift abortion. This committee at the UN reprimanded Belarus for celebrating Mother's Day and told Armenia it needs to combat its stereotypical attitudes and portrayals of motherhood as a noble role."

Wright says if the Senate were to pass CEDAW, it might possibly give a new world court the power to overrule U.S. laws.

"The International Criminal Court came into being on July 1st, and radical feminist groups have admitted that they intend on using the International Criminal Court to enforce treaties like CEDAW. So if there are any violators of CEDAW they could face charges in the International Criminal Court," she explained.

In all, some 170 countries have approved CEDAW. But U.S. conservatives are still putting up a fight. The Bush administration has ordered the Justice Department to review CEDAW's impact, but it is not clear whether that will slow the plan's momentum in the Senate.

Many pro-family groups like National Right to Life are urging members to call their senators on this issue, asking them to vote against the treaty.

The votes of several Republican senators are said to be up in the air. Focus on the Family reports that Senators Gordon Smith of Oregon, George Allen of Virginia, Bill Frist of Tennessee, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, and Richard Lugar of Indiana are swing votes on the committee.

Supporters hope to have a vote before the full Senate by September.

(more on the subject)
"One reason they cite is the radical nature of the CEDAW compliance committee, the group that interprets the document. This panel, considered by UN observers to be the most active and ideological UN committee, criticized Belarus (Russia) for establishing Mother's Day. According to UN records, the committee expressed concern that, in Uzbekistan, "women's motherhood role was taking precedence over their professional and individual development." It also told diplomats from Singapore that "too much emphasis was placed on family in Singapore." The committee urged China to legalize prostitution. It informed Ireland that it was "compromised" by the influence of the Catholic Church, and stated that "the Committee is concerned that, with very limited exceptions, abortion remains illegal in Ireland. Women who wish to terminate their pregnancies need to travel abroad."

Discoteque is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 02:36 PM   #2
War Child
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 526
Local Time: 10:04 AM
Here's hoping it passes with flying colors...

mug222 is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 02:50 PM   #3
War Child
hotpepper's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New York (I wish)
Posts: 739
Local Time: 03:04 AM
Originally posted by mug222
Here's hoping it passes with flying colors...
What mug222 said.
hotpepper is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 05:12 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
speedracer's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 06:04 AM
If everything in that article is true, then I definitely do *not* want the CEDAW committee to have the power to instigate cultural revolutions of their choice in our country.
speedracer is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 06:36 PM   #5
love, blood, life
melon's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 06:04 AM
Ah yes...the "traditional" American family:

--Father goes to work on a 40-hour work week with full benefits. (Oops...that went out the window with the demise of labor laws in the 1980s.)

--Mother stays home, and pops out 6+ children on command of the father, with a belt in his left hand and the Bible in the other.


Do you *really* realize what tradition is doing to women, let alone everyone? I am tired of us reverting to these unrealistic, romanticized ideals of the 1950s that only existed on black-and-white television. These "pro-family" groups are interested solely in controlling women. I'm highly reminded of one of my college educated female friends who has been commanded not to work by her born-again Christian boyfriend, who cites his dominance in the Bible. "Focus on the Family" is nothing but a fundamentalist Christian organization that wishes to take away life choices for women and reassert old time, "traditional" Biblical servitude for women.

While I do have my issues with abortion, the option to have an abortion does not mean that these women will, indeed, have one. That is certainly one more option than what they are given in the "traditional" family, where the woman is generally pregnant on command from her husband. Not exactly your romanticized 1950s American sitcom, now is it?

This UN action, while drastic, is necessary, as even the most "progressive" nations like the U.S. are still heavily controlled ideologically by groups that wish to keep life exactly the way it was millennia ago. Women do, indeed, need some assistance in becoming more independent worldwide, just as men have been independent for all of time.

melon is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 06:42 PM   #6
love, blood, life
melon's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 06:04 AM
I should also add that the U.N. cannot force progress. Indeed, Afghanistan is a good example. Women, now, are free to shed their burqas, and many have. However, many still wear them freely. Options should be there. If the traditions really do make women "happy," then they'll be maintained even with the new options open to them.

What people mean by "maintaining the traditional family" really amounts to "maintaining patriarchal dominance."

melon is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 07:47 PM   #7
Miss MacPhisto's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Planet Pleba
Posts: 1,957
Local Time: 02:04 AM

Mmmm, I have mixed feelings on this. When i first started reading this article, i thought "Oh God, here we go again. Some drug-influenced radicals trying to force women to become men.
But the article didnt turn out to be quite as bad as I feared. If all that is intended by it is to make women in certain cultures aware that there is more to life than motherhood, then thats great!!!!! But, i fear that what they have in mind is to force women to be more like men. Because thats what most feminist extremists have in mind.

Let me state, first and foremost, that
WOMEN ARE NOT MEN , and most of us do not wish to be them. I like being different than men, so please do not force or even encourage me to drive a truck, play football, belch, scratch my crotch, spit, shop in the boys' department, or act manly in any way shape or form.
I also dont want to be encouraged or forced to live my life in the kitchen, wear flowery dresses 24/7, worship children, or any nauseating bullshit like that.
Please. Just let us BE. We are who we are.

It is a fact that boy babies do, in fact, act like boys, and girls act like girls. It is not society that makes us that way, its nature. And there is nothing wrong with it as long as no one is forcing you to be a certain way, and as long as your culture makes it known that there are many ways to live your life, and gives you the freedom to be the way you wish.
It shouldnt become commonplace to see women in more masculine type activities, but it is ok if there are exceptions to the rule.
As for women in places like Afghanistan, yes, they need something like this. They arent even aware that it is possible for women to be good at something other than punching out children like insects.

Motherhood is great for many women, but not most. I hate the way current American society portrays mothers. Even working mothers.
".....People of America - SHUSH-........."

"Well you tell...Bonovista,that i said hello and that my codename is Belleview" - Bono before opening night of Anaheim Elevation concert

Well tonight thank God it's them, instead of you...

^^ Life's a bitch, so i became one ^^
Miss MacPhisto is offline  
Old 08-02-2002, 09:33 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
U2Bama's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 05:04 AM

I will be the first to tell you that women's rights need a huge boost around the globe.

But the issues that Wendy Wright points out are what will keep this treaty from bringing true reforms to the status of women.

What is more important? Women being allowed to see a male doctor, if he is the only doctor around, or a woman in Mexico having the absolute right to "swift and easy" abortion access?

A woman being spared execution by her father or husband because she was raped (to save the family's "honor"), or a women being spared the horror of being "honored" with Mother's Day?

A women whose children are kidnapped and taken overseas by her estranged husband, or a woman who puts her children before her profession or her "individual development"?

I will concede that this article is probably written with a great deal of bias against CEDAW, but if any of those items above are 100% required for the treaty to pass, then I think CEDAW is a bit extreme.

Melon, mug22, & hotpepper: what would really be lost if we had to endure another Mother's Day, or if Mexico does not implement drive-thru abortions? Look, if things like that could be at least compromised, I would support CEDAW along with you. But would you still support CEDAW if it lacked those items? It could go a lot further without those mandates.


U2Bama is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©