Comments about ‘What other say: A troubling vote for those with disabilities’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Dec. 11 2012 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

This highlights the GOP modus operandi

- Take a reasonable idea - supporting our laws (Americans with Disabilities Act) around the world
- look to see if it is supported or introduced by Democrats
- Inject inflammtory rhetoric which has no basis in fact
- perpetuate the lies to build a coalition of the uninformed
- cast a vote, saving America from an imagined dire outcome

ECR
Burke, VA

Thanks DN for printing this thoughtful op-ed from another paper. It seems unfathomable that anyone could conjure up reasons to vote against this treaty but somehow some of the senators did just that. I see this Kansas City newspaper is holding their own Senators accountable for their vote by publicly chastising them for their vote. Hopeful all responsible journalists in every city and state will do the same.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

America could have affirmed its commitment to giving people with disabilities worldwide (including disabled Americans working and traveling abroad) the same rights of access to buildings and transportation that we take for granted through our Americans with Disabilities Act.

But no.

Utah Senators Lee and Hatch voted against this eminently reasonable and important treaty, all so that they can keep the UN-hating neo-Birchers of their party happy.

On Planet Wingnutia they celebrate those "no" votes. Here on Earth, I am deeply ashamed to be a Utahn.

one old man
Ogden, UT

Why should this puzzle anyone? They are simply pandering again to the most extreme members of their party whose tinfoil hats are being shorted out by the black helicopters that fly over every night.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Lee and Hatch have no morals or ethics.

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

Apparently, this important vote will be brought to the floor again for Washington legislators in 2013.
Let's hope that Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee have received the message concerning the major mistake they have made.
There is no question that they have voted in a very strange and controversial way compared to the majority of the world.
It would be beneficial for these two men to prove to America and the world that they are not going off the deep end.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

JoeBlow --

I agree with your comment!

- Take a reasonable idea - supporting our laws (Americans with Disabilities Act) around the world
- look to see if it is supported or introduced by Democrats

=============

Right or Wrong,
Good or Bad,
simply doesn't matter in congress.

It's can only be GOOD for America if MY party sponsors it.
If not, then it's a BAD thing for America.

Nothing like putting the PARTY ahead of the Country!
Pathetic!

Nothing short of Nazi Ghestapo tactics!

UtahBlueDevil
Durham, NC

"Nothing short of Nazi Ghestapo tactics!"

I think that is a bit strong... more like republican witch trials.....

And this is not to say a few democrats in their day have acted as weak kneed on issues either. But to say that the world enacting a law that had its birth in the US is a threat to our own ability to govern ourselves... just silly.

Lets say, just for example that this law had been passed, and some nation thought we were in breach of it - what exactly would they be able to do about it? Really... what are they going to do. issue a letter of reprimand? Good grief, we sent an army into a foreign nation simply because we didn't like their president - the the UN was able to do what about it? China mowed down their own people while protesting for more rights, and the UN did what about it?

These Senators need to put their big boy pants on and explain to lunatic fringe that everything is going to be ok. McCain has proven himself the biggest of cowards. Anyway.... this is just more of the same cowardice we see from politicians every day.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "LDS Liberal" luckily for us, they did put Country ahead of party. The UN treaty included laws to create a central database of any person born with a disability. Would you want your grandchild who is born with a diability to be on a UN registry?

The treaty also grants the UN the authority to determine the care and education for all people on the disabled registry. Do we really want to turn our parental rights over to the UN?

Wonder
Provo, UT

@Red Shirt -- Wrong. Just because Glenn Beck says it turns parental rights over to the UN doesn't mean it does. Do you seriously think anyone would have voted for it if it really did that? Republicans buckled under pressure from people who believe in crackpot conspiracy theories and that's the only reason it didn't pass.

ECR
Burke, VA

I stated earlier that it would be hard for someone to conjure up reasons to vote against this treaty but I see Redshirt and his friends at the Heritage Foundation have done just that. In a lengthy article found in National Review Online, they spend paragraph after paragraph saying essentially the same thing which can be summed up by this one paragraph:

"This is their argument, and it’s such a ridiculous argument," says Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation. "The premises are completely unsupportable, The notion that it might improve travel conditions for Americans traveling abroad is a complete non sequitur, and it has nothing to do with the treaty at all." In other words, the treaty does little to nothing for Americans."

So I guess we should only support international treaties if they can improve upon conditions that already exist for our citizens. Whatever happened to America's desire to change the world for better, not just for our own citizens? Shouldn't we be promoting these rights for citizens everywhere even if our current laws already promote those rights? Isn't that the American thing to do?

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ RedShirt: I suppose you are talking about Article 18, Section 2 - "Liberty of movement and nationality ... Children with disabilities shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and, as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by their parents."

Um - yeah - all children are (or should be) registered after birth - here in the United States it is called applying for a birth certificate and social security number.

Throughout the treaty - including Article 24 - Education - where it uses the phrase "States Parties" that means the appropriate agency within the signatory country.

Article 31 - Statistics and Data Collection says that in order to offer the best services and to make sure the services being offered are appropriate, each country will track data on compliance and effectiveness and, while making sure the data is anonymous, share it with the UN and other countries.

Nowhere in the treaty does it say anything you think it says. It is written in clear language, it means exactly what it says, there is no hidden agenda.

There You Go Again
Saint George, UT

"...Rick Santorum and Glenn Beck...".

They put their "hysteria" agenda ahead of our country.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

I guess we can chalk another one up to Glenn Beck for fanning the political flames over nothing, kind of like his "secret" Obam FEMA concentration camps, and mass gun confisgations that also turned out to be false.

Somedays,
Glenn Beck just reminds me time and again of the story of the little boy who cried wolf.

Is it a constant need for attention?, or is seriously doing it just for the money$.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"The treaty also grants the UN the authority to determine the care and education for all people on the disabled registry. Do we really want to turn our parental rights over to the UN?"

Redshirt,

In my first post, when I wrote

- Inject inflammtory rhetoric which has no basis in fact
- perpetuate the lies to build a coalition of the uninformed

Posts like yours are exactly what I was referring to

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "Kalindra" "LDSLiberal" JoeBlow" and other of your ilk. Read the UN document "Promoting the Rights of Children with Disabilities". They speak of registering kids with disabilities, and keeping databases of disabilities so that they can deploy resources accordingly.

Again, why do we want the UN to have the authority to determine how we are to be caring for the disabled? Do you trust the UN to know what your disabled child needs?

Read the UN document. It either adds nothing to US laws or else surrenders power to the UN. Either way, it is not a good law.

As for what "Kalindra" pointed out. Imagine you are poor and give birth to a disabled child. You give that child up for adoption. Once that child is an adult, a shady lawyer can convince that disabled adult to sue their birth parents because according to the treaty, they were not raised by their birth parents. How much more difficult will it be for teen moms to give up disabled children for adoption?

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Redshirt
Learn to read context, for goodness sake, do I have to be worried that you and your ilk might go crazy and attack friends of mine who work for a sustainability group because you've read Agenda 21?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "atl134" I do read the context of what is being stated. I have not read the UN documents on Agenda 21. You should read teh Democrats Against Adgenda 21 web site. Quite insiteful. That web site is run by an uber liberal who, like you, did not believe what the UN was doing. I have also read some of the Adgenda 21 literature available on the UN web site. Are you saying that I shouldn't read what the UN has published about their own Adgenda 21?

no fit in SG
St.George, Utah

RedShirt....
It must be horribly frightening for you to live in a country where, every day of the year, around every corner, someone is out to get you.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ RedShirt: Please quote the exact verbiage that supports your claims. Thank you.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments