Convention On The Rights Of The Child

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Today we celebrate 30 years of Convention on the Rights of the Child.
A convention EVERY nation signed, except of one: the USA

Can anyone explain me why?
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Today we celebrate 30 years of Convention on the Rights of the Child.
A convention EVERY nation signed, except of one: the USA

Can anyone explain me why?

It's in keeping with US views on exceptionalism. I don't think the USA has any particular problem with the convention (nothing that couldn't be resolved by signing it with specified reservations, as some other nations). Rather the problem is with the concept of something which is universal.

The key problem is that the USA is the only democratic nation that persists in the assertion that its law is supreme. On matters of human rights all nations should be subject to the international community. With all sorts of limits and reservations all are, save the USA. The key problem for the USA is that it has in many states a policy of judicial murder of criminals (the death penalty) which it keeps precisely because it does not agree the international consensus that the state must not murder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perados

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
It's in keeping with US views on exceptionalism. I don't think the USA has any particular problem with the convention (nothing that couldn't be resolved by signing it with specified reservations, as some other nations). Rather the problem is with the concept of something which is universal.

The key problem is that the USA is the only democratic nation that persists in the assertion that its law is supreme. On matters of human rights all nations should be subject to the international community. With all sorts of limits and reservations all are, save the USA. The key problem for the USA is that it has in many states a policy of judicial murder of criminals (the death penalty) which it keeps precisely because it does not agree the international consensus that the state must not murder.
Now as you say it I remember that the USA doesnt accept the international court for war crimes, simply because they can't stand the idea that a US soldier could face this court... only a US court is allowed to judge US soldiers.