Voices For Freedom
© 2006 Daniel J. McLaughlin
The United Nations and Inalienable Rights
The United Nations is an organization that many people hold up as an inspiration for freedom and peace loving people of the world. After all, it has a document called the Universal Declaration Of Human Rights. Included in this document are many of the freedoms that we, as Americans, hold dear. It also, however, has many of the “rights” that the dictators of the former Soviet Union held dear.
A careful reading of the declaration provides a great deal of insight. It is readily available on the internet. The first paragraph of the preamble declares that every human being has “inalienable” rights. Those are enumerated in careful detail in the first 28 articles, presumably the full complement of all rights of individuals. These articles include familiar old friends, such as freedom of speech, press, assembly, and the rights to life, liberty and security of person. Other interesting “inalienable” rights include: “the realization of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for dignity and the free development of personality”, “the right to rest and leisure”, “the right to a determined minimum standard of living” and the right to a “social and international order” in which the rights can be realized.
As it turns out, those rights aren’t exactly inalienable. The exceptions listed in articles 29 and 30 demonstrate just how alienable the rights are. All enumerated rights are subject to the exceptions, including the right to life, liberty and security of person, free speech, the right to organize and assemble, freedom of the press, etc.
I cannot say it better than the actual wording of the document.
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law …, and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
As you can see, under the declaration, by which all signing countries are supposedly bound, we all have inalienable rights. They just cannot be exercised if a member government or the United Nations says so, under virtually any pretext, given the wide open language of the exceptions.
Under the principles of good government set out in the United States Declaration Of Independence and expanded in the Bill Of Rights, inalienable means “CANNOT be alienated”. Since our inalienable rights were given by our Creator, no person or government has the right to prevent their free exercise under any circumstances, as long as that exercise does not infringe upon the rights of others.
The United Nations has proven time and again that the objective is eventual socialist world government. Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has put it rather bluntly, that national sovereignty is an outdated notion. His point is that a global government is needed to plan for the good of the world’s citizens.
The problem with the global government concept is that, just like the former Soviet Union, the ruling elite don’t really have the good of the people in mind. The bigger and more powerful the government, the more removed from the needs of the people. More power also means more money, less accountability and more corruption. The billions of dollars in the oil for food scandal is a good case in point.
It is time for the people of the United States to recognize that our country is the first and last hope for true freedom in this world. Relinquishing our sovereignty to a world government that does not hold fast to the idea of individual liberty should not be an option for any citizen. It is, however, an option for many powerful leaders in the United States government. Ask your representatives what they think. You may be surprised.
The United Nations is a dangerous organization. It is not interested in peace, but rather in establishing itself as the decider of who wins. It is not interested in prosperity and progress, but rather socialist planning and control. It is not interested in rights and liberty, but submission of individuals to the will of “the people”, as represented by an all-knowing dictatorship.
The United Nations is set against the very foundations of the United States and it is well past time for us to boot them out of here.