/PRNewswire/ -- ParentalRights.org and Watchman Cinema are proud to announce the release of "The Child: America's Battle for the Next Generation" on Saturday, November 20, 2010.
The 90-minute documentary explores the current state of parental rights in America. The goal of the production is to bring awareness to the seldom-visited issue of parental rights. With the grassroots efforts of ParentalRights.org, over 300 venues have been booked to premiere this compelling documentary on or around November 20, with the hopes of educating the general public.
"'The Child' will fill this void of unawareness by explaining the situation," Director Grace Tate wrote on the documentary website. "… [Parental rights] are not just an issue – this is a battle for the future."
In 2009, President Obama's administration vowed support for a variety of UN bodies and treaties including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. With the "best interest of the child" standard outlined in the Convention pushed by Senator Barbara Boxer (CA), U.S. Representative to the UN, Susan Rice, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the treaty would grant the government authority to override parental decisions at the state level.
"The Supreme Court held parental rights at a high level in 1925 with Pierce v. Society of Sisters," Farris explains. "But in 2000, the Court really messed up with Troxel v. Granville when parental rights were deemed non-fundamental."
Under the Supremacy Clause (Article VI) of the U.S. Constitution, ratified treaties preempt state law. Since virtually all laws in the U.S. regarding children are state laws, this treaty would negate nearly 100% of existing American family law. The U.S. Constitution is silent on the subject of parental rights, leaving them unprotected against activist judges or the federal treaty power.
"The government gets to decide what is best for children on any subject whatsoever," Farris says. "That's how the Convention works; the government wins all the time."
Featured in the film are interviews with professors, congressmen, coalition leaders, parents and children hailing from all across the country. The Watchman production team, comprised of homeschooled students and graduates from North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia, traveled for months gathering interviews and conducting research on this topic with professional movie-quality equipment.
Parental rights are an issue that motivated many activists in this month's elections, while going largely uncovered by the national media. With close to 160 Congressmen already committed to the Parental Rights Amendment in the House for the 112th Congress, the Amendment promises to be on the agenda in both the House and the Senate next year.
The first premiere will be held at Blue Ridge Bible Church in Purcellville, Virginia on Saturday, November 20. The event is free of charge and open to the public. Preview the trailer at www.parentalrights.org/TheChild.
Showing posts with label amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label amendment. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
National Effort to Amend the Constitution Launched
Thought this interesting----
/PRNewswire/ -- A national effort to add ten specific amendments to the Constitution of the United States was launched this week when the nation's 7,300 state legislators received the book "10 Amendments for Freedom" along with information on how to convene a Constitutional Convention.
The effort is being spearheaded by 10 Amendments for Freedom, Inc., a not-for-profit organization, to provide permanent restraints upon the federal government.
"The initial goal is to have the state legislatures vote to have Congress convene a Constitutional Convention to propose ten specific amendments be added to the Constitution," stated William H. Fruth, Founder and National Director. "After the amendments are proposed by the convention, they will need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states."
The proposed Constitutional amendments include the following topics:
1. Require the federal government to have a balanced budget and stop
incurring debt.
2. Repay the national debt over a 50-year period.
3. Force Congress to be more transparent regarding the legislative
process.
4. Enable the president to have "line-item veto" authority.
5. Limit the number of terms a person can serve in Congress.
6. Mandate Congress control illegal immigration.
7. Provide a legal framework to prevent becoming a bilingual nation.
8. Prevent foreign laws and courts from having authority over the American
people.
9. Restrain the growth of the federal government and prevent "socialism."
10. Allow for the presence of "God" in the public domain.
"The Constitutional Convention will be the most important political event held in 200 years," Fruth continued. "It will reaffirm the belief the American people have in individual liberty and freedom and that government is created to serve the people, not control their lives."
In order to amend the Constitution, an amendment must first be formally "proposed." There are two ways to propose an amendment.
Either Congress, by two-thirds of the vote of both the House and the Senate, or the delegates at a Constitutional Convention may propose amendments.
The Constitution has been amended 27 times. Each amendment was proposed by Congress.
"Since most of the amendments place limits on Congress, it is not likely Congress will propose them," Fruth continued. "As a result, a Constitutional Convention called by the states is needed."
Article V. of the Constitution states that upon the "application" of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states, Congress shall convene a Constitutional Convention.
After the convention is convened, the delegates will decide if each of the amendments should be proposed for ratification.
If they are proposed, 38 states must then ratify them in order for an amendment to become part of the Constitution. The convention itself cannot change the Constitution.
Information regarding this effort and the text of the amendments is posted at http://www.10amendments.org/.
/PRNewswire/ -- A national effort to add ten specific amendments to the Constitution of the United States was launched this week when the nation's 7,300 state legislators received the book "10 Amendments for Freedom" along with information on how to convene a Constitutional Convention.
The effort is being spearheaded by 10 Amendments for Freedom, Inc., a not-for-profit organization, to provide permanent restraints upon the federal government.
"The initial goal is to have the state legislatures vote to have Congress convene a Constitutional Convention to propose ten specific amendments be added to the Constitution," stated William H. Fruth, Founder and National Director. "After the amendments are proposed by the convention, they will need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states."
The proposed Constitutional amendments include the following topics:
1. Require the federal government to have a balanced budget and stop
incurring debt.
2. Repay the national debt over a 50-year period.
3. Force Congress to be more transparent regarding the legislative
process.
4. Enable the president to have "line-item veto" authority.
5. Limit the number of terms a person can serve in Congress.
6. Mandate Congress control illegal immigration.
7. Provide a legal framework to prevent becoming a bilingual nation.
8. Prevent foreign laws and courts from having authority over the American
people.
9. Restrain the growth of the federal government and prevent "socialism."
10. Allow for the presence of "God" in the public domain.
"The Constitutional Convention will be the most important political event held in 200 years," Fruth continued. "It will reaffirm the belief the American people have in individual liberty and freedom and that government is created to serve the people, not control their lives."
In order to amend the Constitution, an amendment must first be formally "proposed." There are two ways to propose an amendment.
Either Congress, by two-thirds of the vote of both the House and the Senate, or the delegates at a Constitutional Convention may propose amendments.
The Constitution has been amended 27 times. Each amendment was proposed by Congress.
"Since most of the amendments place limits on Congress, it is not likely Congress will propose them," Fruth continued. "As a result, a Constitutional Convention called by the states is needed."
Article V. of the Constitution states that upon the "application" of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states, Congress shall convene a Constitutional Convention.
After the convention is convened, the delegates will decide if each of the amendments should be proposed for ratification.
If they are proposed, 38 states must then ratify them in order for an amendment to become part of the Constitution. The convention itself cannot change the Constitution.
Information regarding this effort and the text of the amendments is posted at http://www.10amendments.org/.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
The Founding Fathers Weren't What They are Cracked Up to Be
There's been a movement out and about. The movement that Hollywood is helping to promote. It's a movement that promotes it was the wealthy slaveholders who wrote the Constitution. Really?
Was history checked before this broad statement was recently uttered? I think not. History shows us that of the 55 delegates who were present at one time or another during the Constitutional Congress that only 14 of these men had slaves. What? Yep, 12 of these brilliant men owned or ran large farms which had slaves. Another one, James Madison, owned slaves. Benjamin Franklin also owned slaves but later freed them.
"Well, they were wealthy," say the members of the movement. Not so fast.
Some of the delegates were well off, even considered wealthy. But remember, these same men were willing to sacrifice both their lives and their fortunes for freedom from the tyranny of the King. These same men were Americans. These same men were patriots who believed in limited government of the people and by the people. Some of these same men were not taught in fancy European schools. They were either self taught or served apprenticeships.
As for their supposed wealth? Eight of these men suffered financial problems after the Constitution was written and ended up either in bankruptcy.
So were these founding fathers who helped to create the world's longest surviving Constitution just a bunch of elitists? I think not. They were the men who worked together during heated debate over a four month period to frame the United States Constitution. Was it perfect? Of course not. After all, we have had over 11000 proposed amendments-- and only 27 of them have passed muster with the American public.
Yep, the founding fathers were leaders of their time. They were so much more than those in the movement want us to believe. Wonder when the folks in the movement are going to give up their lives and fortunes in what they say they believe?
Just wondering......
Was history checked before this broad statement was recently uttered? I think not. History shows us that of the 55 delegates who were present at one time or another during the Constitutional Congress that only 14 of these men had slaves. What? Yep, 12 of these brilliant men owned or ran large farms which had slaves. Another one, James Madison, owned slaves. Benjamin Franklin also owned slaves but later freed them.
"Well, they were wealthy," say the members of the movement. Not so fast.
Some of the delegates were well off, even considered wealthy. But remember, these same men were willing to sacrifice both their lives and their fortunes for freedom from the tyranny of the King. These same men were Americans. These same men were patriots who believed in limited government of the people and by the people. Some of these same men were not taught in fancy European schools. They were either self taught or served apprenticeships.
As for their supposed wealth? Eight of these men suffered financial problems after the Constitution was written and ended up either in bankruptcy.
So were these founding fathers who helped to create the world's longest surviving Constitution just a bunch of elitists? I think not. They were the men who worked together during heated debate over a four month period to frame the United States Constitution. Was it perfect? Of course not. After all, we have had over 11000 proposed amendments-- and only 27 of them have passed muster with the American public.
Yep, the founding fathers were leaders of their time. They were so much more than those in the movement want us to believe. Wonder when the folks in the movement are going to give up their lives and fortunes in what they say they believe?
Just wondering......
Thursday, September 24, 2009
White House Tells Congress to Back Off on Czars?
VWV Note: Oh reallllllyyyy? Ummm, do you think the White House has a strong gut feeling that the czars wouldn't pass muster even with a democratic controlled Congress? With all the allegations the Czars face when their pasts are delved into, I think I would be ashamed to have them looked at as well. But then, I never would have appointed them.
Just wondering...
Administration Pushes Dems to Oppose Reigning in Czars
Fox has learned, the White House has urged Senate Democrats not to support an amendment that would impose congressional oversight on "czars.....http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/09/24/administration-pressures-dems-to-oppose-reigning-in-czars/
Just wondering...
Administration Pushes Dems to Oppose Reigning in Czars
Fox has learned, the White House has urged Senate Democrats not to support an amendment that would impose congressional oversight on "czars.....http://congress.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/09/24/administration-pressures-dems-to-oppose-reigning-in-czars/
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Constitutional Convention: Is Our Constitution in Danger?
The last Constitutional Convention was held in 1787 when our founding fathers sought to replace the Articles of Confederation. That was a good thing.
Today, there is a call from way too many states for another Constitutional Convention. What is the purpose of this call? What is the real agenda? Is it for some minor changes or is it destroy our Constitution, the cornerstone of our government?
Should this call go forward, history shows us a way to stop it.
Back in February 1787 when the call went out, the convention was set for May. When the date rolled around, there was not a quorum present. So, if a quorum doesn't show up, the convention cannot happen.
It also takes a quorum to ratify a Constitution. Look back in history and see how that process happened. Perhaps, we should really look at history and copy it. Put all the delegates in a room that is not air conditioned and that has its windows shut and shutters nailed. Keep them there with no time off until the deed is done. Last time, for only 13 states, it took four months.
If, indeed, minor changes are the true agenda for this proposed Constitutional Convention, then maybe an amendment may be more prudent.
My belief is we must hold our elected officials to the oath of office they take--- to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Just a thought as I recall the values of our founding fathers and the freedoms they gave to us.
Today, there is a call from way too many states for another Constitutional Convention. What is the purpose of this call? What is the real agenda? Is it for some minor changes or is it destroy our Constitution, the cornerstone of our government?
Should this call go forward, history shows us a way to stop it.
Back in February 1787 when the call went out, the convention was set for May. When the date rolled around, there was not a quorum present. So, if a quorum doesn't show up, the convention cannot happen.
It also takes a quorum to ratify a Constitution. Look back in history and see how that process happened. Perhaps, we should really look at history and copy it. Put all the delegates in a room that is not air conditioned and that has its windows shut and shutters nailed. Keep them there with no time off until the deed is done. Last time, for only 13 states, it took four months.
If, indeed, minor changes are the true agenda for this proposed Constitutional Convention, then maybe an amendment may be more prudent.
My belief is we must hold our elected officials to the oath of office they take--- to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
Just a thought as I recall the values of our founding fathers and the freedoms they gave to us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
