Haiti Does Not Approve U.S. Legally Kidnapping Children

The Idaho missionaries are being charged with kidnapping and will be tried in Haiti. The United States will not intervene in the matters of the Haitian Government.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) made a position statement supporting international adoptions of Haitian child victims of the earthquake as a last resort.

What is on trial is the mentality of "child removals" or rather legally kidnapping children of poverty. The United Nations also reiterated that governments have an obligation to provide help to families in need, not child removals.

From around the world, Westernized nations who remove children on the basis of need are considered human traffickers, with the United States leading the so-called child welfare brigade, under the direction of God.

So why is it globally frowned upon to remove a child for being poor?

For starters, most of the other "non-Westernized" countries are poor! Haiti is poor. The United States is not.

Now for the kicker. International policy was violated. That violation is to provide assistance to those families in need. This includes finding other relatives or community members first, to care for the child.

Why did these citizens of the United States of America ignore this international policy? Because the United States is the only country in the world that refuses to ratify this policy.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

There are "those" American factions that believe the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is a conspiracy to strip away individual rights by instilling the fallacy of parental rights.

Then there are "those" American factions that believe it is justifiable to promote false data in order to solicit donations.

The truth is that "these American factions" are brutally aware that the ratification of international policies on children would implode the institutional edifices that have promulgated the human trafficking on the basis of poverty.

Simply put, they would be out of business and would be forced to treat people as equals.

One main factor is in the beginning of the document, as it identifies children as being under the age of 18. States would have to amend large portions of its codified functions regarding children, the first being the age of consent. Some states recognize the age of consent at 14 years and this is a major challenge to the CRC, as it forces states to step up efforts to protect children from sexual predators, particularly on the internet. The U.S. would be forced into compliance when it comes to international internet sexual abuses of children, which is something some of "those" American factions would consider a threat to capitalism and free market principles.

The question is open on the sources and amounts the Idaho missionaries would have gained if they were successful in securing the children.

Then, the States would be coerced into international compliance of policy in providing assistance to those families in need instead of removing the child. Poverty is considered as abuse and neglect in the U.S., and that alone, is completely contrary to all U.S. child welfare policy and the direction of God. Just ask the Missionaries from Idaho.

Poverty is not a crime nor should it be a reason to give away a child.  The time has come for the U.S. to adopt the policies of giving to the child, not taking the child. 

U.S. Congress must join the rest of the world and ratify the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, now.