The number of United Nations’ Conventions on human rights that have been ignored by ratifying governments when it suits is legion. Canadians then, should be concerned with the United Nations “Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women,” explained elsewhere in this issue.
It appears that the Canadian government is, indeed, taking seriously its obligations under this Convention. This means that the Convention, together with the equality sections of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, may be used to deny Canadian citizens many important parental and family rights.
When moderate pro-family groups are denied operational funding from federal government, using lame excuses that such organizations do not reflect the aims of either the Charter or the U.N. Convention, it becomes apparent that “equality” is limited to a radical feminist definition. Under the guise of discrimination against women, the family comes to be viewed as a threat to the emancipation of women. This is an example of tunnel vision, if ever there was one.
It is often charged that the pro-life movement is a “single issue” movement and that it cares only for the unborn child. The falsity of such charges is clearly shown once more. Pro-life’s concern for the right to life of the unborn child ties in with concern for many other rights.
We care that mothers, regardless of whether they work inside the home or outside the home, should have financial and social support to raise their children well. We believe that children have a right to grow up healthy and secure. We care about equal rights. We do not believe that equal rights for women means removing rights from men or children.
The mechanistic concept of equality as entertained by radical feminists is threatening indeed. It certainly threatens the traditional understanding of the family as a self-governing unit whose rights are paramount over those elected or appointed to serve, not to rule. The state is made for men and women, not the other way around.