Letter to the Editor
Sen. Joseph Biden invokes the Declaration of Independence in support of U.S. ratification of CEDAW, the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Christina Hoff Sommers, “Look Who’s Preaching
to Us!” editorial page, June 26). But the Declaration is Exhibit A against CEDAW.
The Declaration is a document of general aspiration; that is why its premise that all men are created equal
and are endowed with unalienable rights applied to both women and men and in time become a powerful weapon in the battle for
women’s rights. And the Declaration was much more than aspiration: It was a self-executing political act. The men who
signed it thereby took responsibility for realizing its aspirations by establishing free and independent states, failing which
they would be hanged.
CEDAW,in contrast, is, like the old Soviet constitution, a long list of policy promises drafted by people
who, for the most part, have no intention to take
responsibility for achieving those promises. No one thinks CEDAW is going to produce “comparable worth” wage regulation
in Haiti or Uganda, or end forced abortions of baby girls in China or North Korea, or provide rudimentary legal rights for
the women of Saudi Arabia or Yemen. The governments of these nations (all CEDAW signatories) could, if they wished, actually
pursue those policies at home—and take the political credit or blame according to the views of their citizens—rather
than just recommending them to others. Sen. Biden is an influential political leader in his own nation; if he really wants
to promote nationalized day care (as Vice President Gore proposed to do in the 2000 presidential campaign) or equal wages
for stenographers and firemen, he has the means and responsibility to do so without reference to CEDAW.
CEDAW promotes the notion that rights are things that exist in the abstract—manna from globocrats, NGOs
and activist lawyers rather than the responsibilities of nation-states and their political leaders. Those who signed the Declaration
of Independence stood and fought for the opposite proposition—that rights are secured by governments whose powers to
do so are derived from the consent of the governed.