Posted 10:46 pm Sunday, December 30, 2012
Send to Kindle
American law already protects those with disabilities, December 30
Contrary to a recent letter in the East Texas Mailbox, Sens. Hutchison and Cornyn were correct to vote against the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
Within the U.S., we have protections for persons with disabilities, including but not limited to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Air Carrier Access Act of 1986, the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968.
We do not need laws written and overseen by members of the U.N., who would turn this nation into Third World status. The parents of this nation do not need countries with human rights violations dictating how we will raise our children. Do we really want a treaty that states that “disability is an evolving concept?” A treaty that considers abortion “family planning”?
Whose definitions would ultimately prevail? Those of the U.S., or some country whose laws indicate that women are sub-human or property?
What was the reasoning behind closing the institutions that cared for the mentally ill? Those changes never took into consideration the inability of many of these individuals to care for themselves. Evil does exist in this world. Neither laws nor treaties will change that.
Stella Lundy
Quitman
Within the U.S., we have protections for persons with disabilities, including but not limited to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Air Carrier Access Act of 1986, the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984 and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968.
We do not need laws written and overseen by members of the U.N., who would turn this nation into Third World status. The parents of this nation do not need countries with human rights violations dictating how we will raise our children. Do we really want a treaty that states that “disability is an evolving concept?” A treaty that considers abortion “family planning”?
Whose definitions would ultimately prevail? Those of the U.S., or some country whose laws indicate that women are sub-human or property?
What was the reasoning behind closing the institutions that cared for the mentally ill? Those changes never took into consideration the inability of many of these individuals to care for themselves. Evil does exist in this world. Neither laws nor treaties will change that.
Stella Lundy
Quitman
