THE BIGGEST REASON TO VOTE NO ON THE CHILDREN'S REFERENDUM! LIE OF GOVERNMENT!

Children under threat from Irish State AGAIN

In the Second Video, you will see what powers the UNCRC had in America as the policy was introduced by Stealth into American Law. Shocking Video!

Overruled: Government Invasion of your Parental Rights (Official Movie)

 

These are the 10 Reasons we believe you should vote no in the Children's Rights Referendum.

As we are not funded as an organization, we are unable to send this pamphlet to every home in Ireland. Fortu-nately, some concerned citizens have stepped in and volunteered to try to distribute "10 Reasons" nationwide. Ordinary citizens are so concerned that they will print off our pamphlet at their own expense and take to the streets to hand out leaflets and discuss the Referendum with other parents. If you would like to become involved, please send an email to Sharon@APS.IE who is co-ordinating the nation-wide distribution. A few hours of your time handing out pamphlets or distributing them in your neighborhood could make a huge difference. Also bear in mind that you need to register to vote so make sure your voice is heard by registering.

 

10 Reasons to vote No in the Children's Rights Referendum

1/ Your legal right under Article 42.5 of the Irish Constitution to decide "Best Interests" for your own child will be handed over to the State. Parents will be reduced to Caregivers under the UNCRC. 2/ Your child can be placed for adoption against your will. You will not need to be accused or convicted of any crime and the arbi-trary decision can be made by one person. The entire process will take place in secret Family Courts and you will be gagged and prevent-ed from speaking out. 3/The State can decide for example to vaccinate every child in Ireland, and the parent, and even the child have no say in the matter. You do not need to be consulted or give permission. Joan Burton has already hinted that Child Benefit will be tied into vaccination records, this could be extended to school admission. 4/ The State can decide to give give Birth Control to children of any age, even if they are below the Age of Consent. The State can bring children to other countries for abortions without parental consent and even if the child disagrees. (X case, C Case, D case)

5/ The

UN and the EU can make any laws for children without consent of the Irish Government if it wishes. This allows une-lected people in the EU and UN to write Irish Laws without prior notice. This removes what little Sovereignty Ireland has as a nation. 6/ The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child is no mere statement of altruism, it is a legally binding Human Rights Treaty which, if Article 42 is changed, will allow unelected people in the EU and UN to re-write Irish Law. Fully ratifying the UNCRC will now make every other treaty that we have ratified also apply to all Irish Children. The entire landscape of Irish Law may need to be rewritten. 7/The UNCRC does not give Irish children any privileges they did not possess before. Parents have always vindicated the rights for their child. As children are not autonomous, the State can decide anything even if the child disagrees. Effectively, this also removes children's rights. 8/ The "Best Interest Principle" of the UN is nothing more than a slogan. Was it in the "Best Interests" of the 260 who died in Irish State "Care", or the 500 who went missing and many were later found to have been trafficked into prostitution and slavery? We be-lieve if Ireland is to have a World-Class Child Protection System that "Best Interests" should be replaced with "to the Measured and Demonstrated Benefit of the Child" and it will need to be measured and demonstrated. Despite 760 children missing or dead in a decade, nobody has ever been held accountable. In the Baby P case 2 doctors were struck off and 4 social workers fired, in Ireland 260 dead, 500 missing and nobody was punished. 9/ The UNCRC only gives "Rights" to children but there is no obligation on the Government to comply. Children in developing nations whose Governments have ratified the UNCRC have the right to food and water and yet children are dying. Children are executed in some countries and the UNCRCC does not protect them, only their "Rights". Many of the countries that have ratified the UNCRC allow for Child Soldiers, Child Forced Marriage, the Death Penalty for Children and even Female Genital Mutilation. The UNCRC does not pro-tect children, their parents protect them. 10/ The question we are being asked here is "do you trust the Irish State, the UN and the EU to make

decisions for your children when your parental rights have been eliminated?"

If you are not 100% sure you must vote NO!

Please register to vote and vote No, our children are depending on you. Please also do the research for yourself on our website APS.ie and make an informed decision, our children are depending on you.

Children do have rights that the proposed new amendment will remove. Currently children have three levels of legal protection. (1) They have the same citizen rights as everyone else under the constitution. (2) Recognising that children cannot vindicate their own rights, the constitution places on parents the duty to protect children, and vindicate their rights. (3) Recognising that parents sometimes fail, the constitution imposes on the state the obliga-tion to intervene where parents fail.

Suggestions that the constitution prevented necessary intervention by the state are untrue. The most often mentioned case involved failure by the state to come to court with the evi-dence that few doubt was available to it. This amendment seeks to deny children their right to parental protection and increase the power of the state to make fundamental decisions regarding their lives.

Views: 886

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Tír na Saor ~ Land of the Free to add comments!

Join Tír na Saor ~ Land of the Free

Comment by Finnegan on July 19, 2015 at 13:53

Well done JJ .  That's good news for our children . Thank you .

Comment by JJ on July 19, 2015 at 10:13

Final result of the Challenge to Referendum result

It is more than two and a half years since we embarked on a challenge to the children's referendum result.  But today the case was brought to a close with the settlement of the costs. I was not able to warn you because I only discovered last night that the issue of the costs was before the courts today.

Joanna Jordan, the plaintiff in the cases tells us what happened today.

"Today the 7th of July 2015 I was in the Supreme Court for the costs hearing. Paul Sreenan SC, Naimh Highland SC and Kevin Brophy solicitor were also present. The same  seven  Supreme Court Judges presided. Yesterday the state made us an offer. Today we asked for more and got a final settlement agreed by all. We presented this to the judges and it was made an order of court.

The settlement is this; the High Court costs settlement will stand - we will get 1/3 of our costs for the petition case, both pay their own costs for the plenary case.

In the supreme court section , the state pays for themselves and we get 50% of our total costs , professional fees and ongoing expediences.

This is a good outcome for us. The expenses will be covered, our solicitor and barristers will get a % of their total fee and I do not have to pay anything. Thank God.

The judges did not seem pleased with this outcome. Once agreement had been reached they could only accept

I am much relieved. Thanks to all supporters for your contributions and your prayers. God Bless all. Yours Joanna"

Comment by JJ on June 21, 2014 at 9:15

The President still can't sign into law the result of the rigged Referendum on Children's Rights (so called) and I would ask members to be alert to the forthcoming Supreme Court hearing where the whole issue of the Referendum and how it was conducted will be aired. The Government plan to price the Opposition out of the market BUT the donations however small keep coming in to the challenge fund and the support grows as people realise just how important this case is. Well done to our former MEP for spearheading this campaign

Comment by JJ on June 21, 2014 at 9:08

Dear Friends,
Thursday the Referendum Challenge was in for mention before the Supreme Court.  Johanna Jordan describes: "Chief Justice Denham presided. She asked how our case was proceeding. We were able to tell her that the Judgement in the Plenary was to be delivered the next day.  We asked for both cases to be run together in the Supreme  Court and she agreed. She said to come back in two weeks and then she would set a day for a four day hearing possibly in the autumn term( October/ November). We were very pleased with the outcome."
Friday morning in the High Court, Justice Paul McDermott gave judgement in the plenary (constitutional) case. It took him almost 2 hours to read his 75 page decision in which he said NO to everything from the hearings that he chose to engaged with. The following description is from memory as I do not yet have a copy of the judgement which I presume will be online soon. 
The judgement engaged with the Hanafin Judgement at great length and spent only a little time on McCrystal. It  reiterated the negatives of Judge McDermott's  petition judgement. It also talked about certain European documents that had been entered in to hearing on proof of best practice in the conduct of referenda which he said were not binding in Ireland and then proceeded to discuss them. Despite the length of the judgement, Justice McDermott seemed to completely ignore several important lines of argument  from the hearing and even despite his extensive coverage of the Hanafin judgement ignored the parts favourable to our case.
Although the ideal High Court judgement would have been one that was favourable, this judgement is the next best thing. It is so negative and so selective that it makes things very clear for the Supreme Court. The High Court judgement gives a green light to government interference in referenda by making in unchallengeable...it confirms the Hanafin Judgement that has stopped citizen from challenging blatant government misconduct for almost two decades. I am including a well researched memo on the history of  government interference in referenda at the end of this email.
The High Court in McCrystal (on which this case is based) was similarly negative and unhelpful to citizens defending the integrity of referenda. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned this decision reiterating the sovereignty of the people and the importance of referenda.
We are now at the same point. Jordan goes before the Supreme Court with two High Court judgements which cumulatively acknowledge that in the 31st Amendment (so called "Childrens Rights") referendum there was serious government inference in which public funds were illegally spent (breaking the McKenna Principles) but that there is nothing anyone can go about it.
Given the McCrystal Judgement, we have reason to be confident that the Supreme Court will find this unacceptable and will do something about it, that the SC will say that referenda must be fair and free  and that there must be a way to ensure this against government interference.
At the costs hearing, in the afternoon, both sides asked for costs. Johanna Jordan describes it thus, "Judge Mc Dermott seemed to be siding with the state in their arguments that I pay their costs.I panicked then and sent a text out for more prayer. He took a 25 minute break and came back with the judgement. No award of costs. That is both parties pay their own costs."
This High Court decision like his other ones reinforces the powerlessness of the citizen to defend the right of referenda and will also be appealed to the Supreme Court.
We are finally getting to the most important stage of this whole referendum challenge, the Supreme Court.  Now things will get very interesting!
Support for this case has grown incredibly, thank you everyone who has donated, followed its progress, spread the word and prayed.... please keep it up.
To Donate: By Post: Referendum Challenge
 C/o Kathy Sinnott, St Joseph, Ballinabearna, Ballinhassig,Co Cork
By Bank Transfer: Account Number:  49759039.Sort Code: 934348
Bank Branch: Aillied Irish Bank, Douglas Cork
Name of Account: Kathryn Sinnott/Peter McKendrick (Referendum Challenge)
 IBAN: IE69AIBK93434849759039:Swift Code: AIBKIE2D

Comment by JJ on June 21, 2014 at 9:03

Dear Friends,
Thursday the Referendum Challenge was in for mention before the Supreme Court.  Johanna Jordan describes: "Chief Justice Denham presided. She asked how our case was proceeding. We were able to tell her that the Judgement in the Plenary was to be delivered the next day.  We asked for both cases to be run together in the Supreme  Court and she agreed. She said to come back in two weeks and then she would set a day for a four day hearing possibly in the autumn term( October/ November). We were very pleased with the outcome."
Friday morning in the High Court, Justice Paul McDermott gave judgement in the plenary (constitutional) case. It took him almost 2 hours to read his 75 page decision in which he said NO to everything from the hearings that he chose to engaged with. The following description is from memory as I do not yet have a copy of the judgement which I presume will be online soon. 
The judgement engaged with the Hanafin Judgement at great length and spent only a little time on McCrystal. It  reiterated the negatives of Judge McDermott's  petition judgement. It also talked about certain European documents that had been entered in to hearing on proof of best practice in the conduct of referenda which he said were not binding in Ireland and then proceeded to discuss them. Despite the length of the judgement, Justice McDermott seemed to completely ignore several important lines of argument  from the hearing and even despite his extensive coverage of the Hanafin judgement ignored the parts favourable to our case.
Although the ideal High Court judgement would have been one that was favourable, this judgement is the next best thing. It is so negative and so selective that it makes things very clear for the Supreme Court. The High Court judgement gives a green light to government interference in referenda by making in unchallengeable...it confirms the Hanafin Judgement that has stopped citizen from challenging blatant government misconduct for almost two decades. I am including a well researched memo on the history of  government interference in referenda at the end of this email.
The High Court in McCrystal (on which this case is based) was similarly negative and unhelpful to citizens defending the integrity of referenda. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned this decision reiterating the sovereignty of the people and the importance of referenda.
We are now at the same point. Jordan goes before the Supreme Court with two High Court judgements which cumulatively acknowledge that in the 31st Amendment (so called "Childrens Rights") referendum there was serious government inference in which public funds were illegally spent (breaking the McKenna Principles) but that there is nothing anyone can go about it.
Given the McCrystal Judgement, we have reason to be confident that the Supreme Court will find this unacceptable and will do something about it, that the SC will say that referenda must be fair and free  and that there must be a way to ensure this against government interference.
At the costs hearing, in the afternoon, both sides asked for costs. Johanna Jordan describes it thus, "Judge Mc Dermott seemed to be siding with the state in their arguments that I pay their costs.I panicked then and sent a text out for more prayer. He took a 25 minute break and came back with the judgement. No award of costs. That is both parties pay their own costs."
This High Court decision like his other ones reinforces the powerlessness of the citizen to defend the right of referenda and will also be appealed to the Supreme Court.
We are finally getting to the most important stage of this whole referendum challenge, the Supreme Court.  Now things will get very interesting!
Support for this case has grown incredibly, thank you everyone who has donated, followed its progress, spread the word and prayed.... please keep it up.
To Donate: By Post: Referendum Challenge
 C/o Kathy Sinnott, St Joseph, Ballinabearna, Ballinhassig,Co Cork
By Bank Transfer: Account Number:  49759039.Sort Code: 934348
Bank Branch: Aillied Irish Bank, Douglas Cork
Name of Account: Kathryn Sinnott/Peter McKendrick (Referendum Challenge)
 IBAN: IE69AIBK93434849759039:Swift Code: AIBKIE2D

Comment by Charles Magus on February 2, 2014 at 18:22

If you don't mind JJ, I will post your comment on Face Book, that way it should get a much bigger response.

Comment by JJ on February 1, 2014 at 10:17

Hi People,

Got this from Kathy about the Supreme Court Challenge on the Children's Referendum:


Should the Jordan Case succeed in the Supreme Court, this would seem to be the most logical outcome.

We know from witness evidence in the High Court that this department prepared the last referendum long in advance and deliberately kept the issue low key so that it could hold a surprise quicky referendum in which they and their supporting NGOs could control the message.

Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me!

There is no reason to expect them to differently and recent tweets and other indicators point to ongoing preparations for the possibility of a referendum rerun.

I am writing to a you and others in this BCC email to alert you and to ask you to start giving consideration to a possible Childrens Rights 2.
I have taken your names from emails kind of randomly from the last referendum and interest since. There are many more that I have missed so if there is someone you think could be helpful in this preliminary stage please send this email to them.

There is much that can be done at this stage to avoid the almost one sided campaign of Oct Nov 2012. We need to anticipate the arguments, educate ourselves on the UNCRC and its Irish version, track proposed developments in education, adoption, child services, family courts, etc raising public awareness of the agenda and where these changes are leading and what they are causing even now, prepare draft leaflets and posters, gather commitments on funds for a campaign, pray, raising awareness on government abuse of referena also, etc.

It is not too early to start forming a network and identifying who volunteers to do what (there is something for everyone in this effort to protect children, parents and the family from State take over).

I think the first thing is to start discussing what is needed and get our heads around the whole picture. I would dearly like to see out of this, people come forward to organize nationally and locally. 

At the end of the day, if, God Forbid!, there is no rerun, none of the effort would be wasted because we will have the important but even more difficult task of protecting innocent children, parents and families in State Control.

Hope to hear from you or others you recommend.

God bless
Kathy Sinnott <kathysinnott@gmail.com>;

Comment by Charles Magus on November 25, 2012 at 14:33

Thank you all for your Comments Especially JJ! Highly informative information! As Free and Sovereign Beings, we can never have our rights taken away unless we agree to them being taken away! (Which I Don't!) Power to the People!!

Cheers Joe, Farida and of Course JJ!

Namaste!
Charles.

Comment by JJ on November 25, 2012 at 11:32

With just 19% of the electorate pushing thro this Bill the Government must be very pleased indeed. They'll be able to push anything through now and the people are not an opposition. Great to see a legal challenge has been mounted
JJ
(ps: if we had Direct Democracy then 50,000 signatures could secure a change?)

Comment by JJ on November 9, 2012 at 7:44
and now even the Supreme Court has criticised the Government's big push for a YES vote with its biased handbook. The writing is on the wall?

© 2017   Created by Kev.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service