At the United Nations, the governments (and the dictatorships) of the world are conspiring to deny their people a means to defend their families and their liberty.

The Small Arms Treaty and the U.N.’s project on International Small Arms Control Standards seek to impose global restrictions on gun ownership that would apply to Americans and the citizens of every country that ratified the agreements. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has pledged to support the treaty, an excuse for governments everywhere to empower themselves and limit their citizens instead of the other way around.

As long as we’re limited to fighting over the Left’s gun control agenda we’re debating on their terms. We have to go on offense.

The Constitution does not give us the right to bear arms. It says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. We already have the right, because it doesn’t come from government–it comes from God.

Our founders understood this right is essential to the defense of liberty. It was a lesson they learned firsthand at the Battles of Lexington and Concord, 237 years ago this week. As David Hackett Fischer’s Paul Revere’s Ride recounts, in order to quench the beginnings of the American Revolution, British soldiers marched to confiscate gunpowder and other militia supplies, an act that they hoped would incapacitate the colonial rebels. Thus, it was in defense of the right to bear arms as a means of securing the other liberties that the first battle of the American Revolution was fought.

As the Second Amendment implies, the right to bear arms isn’t given to us by the government, and it isn’t just an American right. It is a human right. As a fundamental component of self-defense, the right to bear arms is intimately tied to those universal truths expressed in our Declaration of Independence–that all men have rights to life and liberty, with which they are endowed by their Creator. And they have not just a right but a duty to throw off despotic government.

These truths are universal. The Second Amendment is an amendment for all mankind.

Every person on the planet has the right to defend themselves from those who would oppress them, exploit them, harm them, or kill them.

Far fewer women would be raped, far fewer children would be killed, far fewer towns would be destroyed, and far fewer dictators would survive if people everywhere on the planet had this God-given right to bear arms recognized. Mass killings and rapes like those that took place in Darfur might have been prevented if the people had the right and the means to defend themselves. When citizens have the power to defend themselves against a violent and tyrannical regime, governments think twice about trampling the lives and liberty of the people.

The United Nations has an extensive Declaration of Human Rights, including the right to join a labor union and the right to social services and security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood or old age.

Nowhere does it provide for the right to keep and bear arms that in many places around the world is so critical to self-defense. And the Small Arms Treaty is a deliberate attempt to restrict these human rights.

I believe the United States should submit to the U.N. a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right to every person on the planet.

It is critical not just for those living under oppressive regimes, but for the many people who live in conditions in which the government cannot secure their safety. From dangerous neighborhoods even here in the United States to lawless regions of the world run by gangs and warlords, firearms are often the only means of personal security.

When criminals have weapons, taking away the right to bear arms is nothing less than eliminating the right to self-defense. Only the elites, who’ve never had to live in a dangerous place or fear for their own lives, could be so confident that denying ordinary citizens the right to bear arms would make everyone safer.

It isn’t enough to watch people move from one dictatorship to another, nations lurching from disaster to disaster. In submitting a treaty to the U.N. guaranteeing that right, America can represent its trust in the basic decency of millions of people around the world and our belief that the God-given rights in the Declaration of Independence apply to them, too. We can let them know that if they had a government that recognized their inherent rights, a government that understood that they are citizens, not subjects, a government that understood it is government which is to be limited, not people, they too would have the chance to pursue happiness and live in safety.

That’s the message our president and secretary of state should be standing up for, not a document designed for the protection of dictators.

Roman Catholic leaders are calling for two weeks of public protests against President Barack Obama’s policies as they intensify their argument that the administration is engaged in a war on religion.

The days between June 21 and July 4 have been set aside by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops which has sought to end the administration’s contraception mandate, among other policies.

The protests against the Obama administration’s policies could be “the game-changer” in the presidential election, one leading lay churchman told Newsmax on Tuesday.

The protests, dubbed “A Fortnight for Freedom” will be an “unprecedented, aggressive attack” against policies that church leaders see as an assault on religious freedom, said Catholic Advocate chairman Deal Hudson.


“The bishops are seeing – rightly – a pattern of emerging of hostility towards the Catholic faith for upholding protection of the life of the unborn and because of its position on contraception,” said Hudson.

And Bill Donohue, the president of the Catholic League pointed out to Newsmax that the protests will come around the time the Supreme Court issues its judgment on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Unless the justices throw the act out completely, the protests could not be timed better, he said.

“If the individual mandate falls and the rest stands it will be more important than ever for Catholics to step forward and get involved,” said Donohue. “We will have to make the point that we are not going anywhere.”

Donohue said the mandate to make insurance companies cover not only contraceptives but abortion-inducing drugs is the key, he said. “It was done on purpose as a wedge to open the door. If we don’t fight it the next step is to force Catholic hospitals to provide abortion facilities,” he said.

“The idea that I as a Catholic should have to pay for some woman’s abortion makes me want to reach for the vomit bag.”

Donohue praised the bishops for their proactive stance “if for no other reason than to make the point that they are furious,” he said.

“Over the years there have been times when the resolve of the bishops wasn’t quite what we wanted it to be. Today that resolve is extremely strong,” he said.

The two weeks of protest has been called by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “That is not the type of body that goes out of its way to pick a fight,” Catholic Advocate’s Hudson pointed out.

“That is precisely what makes this so unusual a moment. The bishops have been provoked to such a degree that they will go to this extreme. They would prefer quiet negotiations leading to a principled compromise, instead they are talking about the probability of civil disobedience.”

Republicans are hoping the protests, planned for June and July will have a major bearing on the election which will follow four months later. They look forward to TV shots of robed priests and nuns being led away in handcuffs.

“These would be devastating images for the Obama administration,” GOP strategist Ron Bonjean told The Hill. “You have a very important religious demographic coming out in protest of Obama’s policies and being arrested for their expression.”

And Hudson agreed. When asked if the protests could be a game-changer come election time, he responded. “Potentially it could be the game-changer.

“It is a mistake to prognosticate with certainty this far out from the election, but two weeks of protest in mid-summer will help put this before the conventions and make it a major issue in the campaign.”

Hudson said Catholic Advocate has already been working in battleground states including Iowa, Ohio, North Carolina and Pennsylvania to get its message across and is about to start work in New Mexico.

“At one meeting in Des Moines, we had about 80 people and one guy sat in the corner and at the end he raised his hand and said he had been a life-long social justice Catholic – so I was getting ready for the big smackdown on all the stuff we had been doing.

“But he said, ‘I’ve just had it with Obama.’ That was a moment that really got my attention.”

The bishops outlined their plan in an April 12 statement signed by Conference general secretary, Msgr. Ronny Jenkins. The statement entitled “Our First, Most Cherished Liberty” was drawn up by the ad hoc committee for religious liberty, which includes 11 bishop members including Archbishop of Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl, one of Obama’s fiercest critics in the church.

They called on fellow bishops to focus “all the energies the Catholic community can muster” to arrange special events to highlight the importance of defending religious liberty.

The dates were picked to run from the feast day of martyrs St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More to Independence Day. “This special period of prayer, study, catechesis, and public action would emphasize both our Christian and American heritage of liberty,” the bishops said.

“Dioceses and parishes around the country could choose a date in that period for special events that would constitute a great national campaign of teaching and witness for religious liberty.”

It referred to the mandate that church-affiliated organizations such as hospitals, schools and universities would have to provide contraceptive coverage in their employees’ insurance policies as well as state and local moves that the church says affects its freedom.

“Religious liberty is not only about our ability to go to Mass on Sunday or pray the Rosary at home,” the statement said. “It is about whether we can make our contribution to the common good of all Americans. Can we do the good works our faith calls us to do, without having to compromise that very same faith?

“What is at stake is whether America will continue to have a free, creative, and robust civil society—or whether the state alone will determine who gets to contribute to the common good, and how they get to do it.”

Hudson said that in many ways the statement itself is more important than the two weeks of action, but he accepted it would not get as much publicity.

“This is not something to get giddy about,” he said. “It would be sad if it came to priests or lay people or bishops being led away in handcuffs. What could be a sadder moment in the history of our nation than to see Catholics arrested for simply refusing to compromise on a central moral principle of their faith?”

President Barack Obama is expanding the role of government and limiting freedom and opportunity for Americans.GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney said at the National Rifle Association convention in St. Louis.
In his remarks, Romney noted that the framework of law created by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution was the source of the country’s greatness.

“It has generated unparalleled opportunity and prosperity,” he said. “Our Founders understood this, which is why they created a system of government that is limited. This President is moving us away from our Founders’ vision. Instead of limited government, he is leading us toward limited freedom and limited opportunity.”

Romney said the U.S. economy is “fueled by freedom” and driven by free people and free enterprise.

“The Obama administration’s assault on our economic freedom is the principal reason why the recovery has been so tepid — why it couldn’t meet their projections, let alone our expectations. The President’s assault on economic freedom begins with his tax hikes,” he said.

“By their very nature, taxes reduce our freedom. Their only role in a free economy should be to fund services that are absolutely essential, such as national security, education, and the care of those who cannot care for themselves. And, yet, President Obama has proposed raising the marginal tax rate from 35 percent to 40 percent. The Vice President has proposed a new global business tax. Medical device companies are soon to be subject to a new tax on revenues. And the President is now touring the country, touting a new tax on investment and the wealthy.”

Another burden on business is regulation, Romney said, noting that the Dodd-Frank law governing banking is an “848-page behemoth.”

“Under President Obama, bureaucrats are insinuating themselves into every corner of our economy, undermining economic freedom,” he said. “They prevent drilling rigs from going to work in the Gulf. They keep coal from being mined. They impede the reliable supply of natural gas. They tell farmers what their children can and can’t do to help on the farm.

“Will Rogers famously said that he worried whenever Congress was in session. Today, our freedom is never safe — because unelected, unaccountable regulators are always on the prowl. And under President Obama, they are multiplying. The number of federal employees has grown by almost 150,000 under this president.”

Romney said the rampant regulation puts the American Dream at risk by stifling those with ideas.

“If we continue along this path, we’ll spend our lives filling out forms, complying with excessive regulations and pleading with political appointees for waivers, subsidies, and permission” he said. “That path erodes freedom. It deadens the entrepreneurial spirit. And it hurts the very people it’s supposed to help.”

The Obama administration assault on freedom includes religious freedom through its efforts to force Catholic schools and hospitals to provide birth control as part of their health plan coverage and personal freedoms with Obamacare. He also charged that Obama has created new laws that burden lawful gun owners.

Romney warned that in a second term Obama “would be unrestrained by the demands of re-election.”

“In his first term, we’ve seen the president try to browbeat the Supreme Court,” Romney said. “In a second term, he would remake it. Our freedoms would be in the hands of an Obama Court, not just for four years, but for the next 40. That must not happen.

“As President, I will uphold the rule of law — and put America back on the path toward the Founders’ vision. I don’t want to transform America; I want to return America to the principles that made this nation great.”

Almost daily we read of America‘s “waning power” and “inevitable decline,” as observers argue over the consequences of defense cuts and budget crises. Yet much of the new American “leading from behind” strategy is a matter of choice, not necessity.

Apparently, both left-wing critics of U.S. foreign policy and right-wing Jacksonians are tiring of spending blood and treasure on seemingly ungrateful Middle Easterners — after two Gulf wars, the decade in Afghanistan and various interventions in Lebanon and Libya.

We certainly have plenty of planes and bombs with which to pound Syria‘s Bashar Assad. Never in the last 70 years has the U.S. military been so lethal.

But chaos in Libya followed the death of Moammar Gadhafi, and the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood seems poised to replace Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Most Americans assume that if we were to remove the murderous Assad dynasty in Syria, the rebels would either show us no gratitude or install a replacement regime not much better.

So much of our sagging profile abroad is simply a growing realization that the Middle East is, well, the Middle East: You can change the faces, but the regimes end up mostly the same — as innate reflections of the volatile mix of tribalism, vast infusions of oil money, radical Islam and generations of dependency.

Can decline be better measured by our vast debt of $16 trillion, growing yearly with $1 trillion deficits? Perhaps.

But Americans know that with a new tax code, simple reforms to entitlements, and reasonable trimming of bloated public salaries and pensions, we could balance federal budgets.

The budget crux is not due to an absence of material resources, but a preference for not acting until we are forced to in the 11th hour.

Do high gas prices and huge imported-oil fees reflect an energy-short America? Not really.

There are 25 billion barrels of oil sitting right off California‘s central coast, and much more in Alaska, the Midwest, the Gulf of Mexico and the Eastern shore.

At some point, when gas hits $5 or $6 a gallon, a new generation of Americans will be cured of its smugness and decide to tap trillions of dollars in natural riches.

In other words, the manifest symptoms of decline — frustration with the Middle East, military retrenchment, exorbitant energy costs and financial insolvency — are choices we now make, but need not make in the future.

If our students are burdened with oppressive loans, why do so many university rec centers look like five-star spas? Student cellphones and cars are indistinguishable from those of the faculty.

The underclass suffers more from obesity than malnutrition; our national epidemic is not unaffordable protein, but rather a surfeit of even cheaper sweets.

Flash-mobbers target electronics stores for more junk, not bulk food warehouses in order to eat. America‘s children do not suffer from lack of access to the Internet, but from wasting hours on video games and less-than-instructional websites. We have too many, not too few, television channels.

The problem is not that government workers are underpaid or scarce, but that so many of them seem to think mind readers, clowns and prostitutes come with the job.

An average American with an average cellphone has more information at his fingertips than did a Goldman Sachs grandee 20 years ago. Over the last half-century, bizarre new words entered the American vocabulary — triple-dipping, Botox, liposuction, jet set, COLA (cost of living adjustment), three-day weekend, Medi-something compounds (Medicare, Medicaid, Medi-Cal) — that do not reflect a deprived citizenry.

In 1980, a knee or hip replacement was experimental surgery for the 1%; now it is a Medicare entitlement.

American poverty is not measured by absolute global standards of available food, shelter and medical care, or by comparisons to prior generations, but by one American now having less stuff than another.

As America re-examines its military, entitlements, energy sources and popular culture, it will learn that our “decline” is not due to material shortages, but rather arises from moral confusion over how to master, rather than being mastered by, the vast riches we have created.

If decline is fighting just two wars at a time rather than three, just budgeting what we did in 2008, tapping a bit more oil offshore, or having our colleges offer more grammar courses and fewer rock-climbing walls, then by all means bring it on.