Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
#1 Supporters of the treaty argued that the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities would simply require the rest of the world to meet the standards that Americans already enjoy under the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act.
Well, gee whiz, if we already have the pertinent laws on the books why the need to ratify a treaty, other than to surrender power to an unelected non-American bureaucratic wannabee?
Posted by Procopius2k 2012-12-05 07:49||
2012-12-05 07:49||
Front PageTop
#2 Good point, P2K. And, as we saw in that Pakistaini essay on free speech the other day (the one that Fred ruthlessly savaged), forcing American values on the world is mean, hateful and un-Islamic. It prolly bees raciss, too.
Posted by SteveS 2012-12-05 08:55||
2012-12-05 08:55||
Front PageTop
#3 We have the ADA law passed in this country under George H.W. Bush. Let the UN worry about these things in other countries or let other countries exercise their sovereign rights to address such issues. I see no need to get in bed with the UN. Most likely, this involves US taxpayer money in some way. Don't we have significant problems in this country that beg attention?
Posted by JohnQC 2012-12-05 09:04||
2012-12-05 09:04||
Front PageTop
#4 Dammit Dole, got yourself hurt defending the USA from the dictates of foreign governments, what the crap support any UN treaty which would override US law?
Posted by swksvolFF 2012-12-05 12:26||
2012-12-05 12:26||
Front PageTop
#5 As a Recipient of the ADA, I am quite glad this got voted down. I am not glad how close the vote was.
Posted by Charles 2012-12-05 16:58||
2012-12-05 16:58||
Front PageTop
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
