I came across this article which explains the Pope's support - apparent support - for the UNCRC. It is a well-written article: lots of documentation, lots of evidence, and quotations from original sources. The article was written by John-Henry Westen, and published at LifeSiteNews.com.
Westen documents the meaning behind the Pope's statement that there is "an urgent need" for the UNCRC "to be implemented in full." The statement came after many reservations (found here) were made on the UNCRC by the Vatican on issues including life, family planning, education, sex education, and preservation of the rights of parents. The statement has come to mean that the Pope totally supports the UNCRC, which is not true.
The fact that the Vatican supported this with reservations on many points requires us as Americans to step back and take ratification very seriously. We cannot ratify this with reservations; our Constitution's Supremacy Clause requires us to support this treaty in full, or break faith and honor. For traditional Americans, we are men and women of our word: we will not sign a child's rights treaty which we do not intend to follow.
The question is then raised, "Why would we need to ratify it, anyway?" I raised this question in the last post, but will bring it up again: "Do we need to ratify the UNCRC to protect children?" We have state laws which provide for child abuse and child neglect. We have international treaties which show our commitment to human rights; why do we need another one if it "does nothing"? If it has no teeth, why do we expect it to do anything? If it can do things, why do we want to do it through the CRC instead of through our laws?
Friends, this fight is perhaps the greatest fight of our lifetime: join it, and protect children by empowering parents.
Watching the stars,
"The hour has struck." -- Glenstorm