Here is a compilation my wife put together for our family and friends on this issue:

Do you or the Government know what's best for your children and grandchildren? I'm sorry that there is a lot of information here. I've tried to pare it down and just give links for you to read for more information. I need your help and time today. I'm asking you because I think you care about your family and would care enough to make a difference for it and other people's families. Please take the time to consider doing as the following link instructs after reading the rest of this email if the information motivates you as it has me.
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={E1213433-960D-4C17-BBD5-DDDA332C991B}

In the email attached is an HSLDA article with important information you need to know about David Ogden, nominated by President Barrack Obama to the position of deputy attorney general of the United States, the second highest position in the Justice Department. (Also pasted at the very bottom in case the attachment doesn't come through.) The jist of it is that Ogden has a history of representing /Playboy/ and other purveyors of pornography in high-profile legal cases. He also challenged the legality of using filters on library computers to protect children from seeing pornography. Most importantly Ogden believes that the legal rules contained in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child are already binding on the United States, even though this treaty has never been sent to the U.S. Senate for ratification.

This is an article with more information about Ogden and a link to see who is on the Senate Judiciary Committee who will in the next few days confirm him or not.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=414212

*Note:*/ It would be best to call the local offices of your senators in your state, as phone lines on Capitol Hill are tied up by voters concerned about pending economic incentive legislation. /
http://capwiz.com/hslda/home/

This link is an article about the University of Cincinnati promoting a week long event that showcased "that porn is not necessarily a bad thing." Today's current sex education at its best? I think not.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=412040

*The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) could now very soon be law in America. It could be before the Senate in 60 days.*
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={C483C563-EBDC-40F1-A33B-D2819B6230A6}

In Chelsea, Maine 1998 two young girls were taken from their mother in August. The mother was never charged with abuse or neglect, nor with any crimes against her daughters. The girls were placed with a woman who was a former worker for the Department of Human Services. This woman had quit her job with DHS in part so she could foster the two girls, whom she hoped to ultimately adopt. The 5 year old girl had anger issues stemming from being taken from her mother by the state. On January 31, 2001 during an outburst, the former DHS worker took the girl to the basement of her home and duct-taped her to a high chair, allegedly to allow her to continue her rant in a secure setting. The duct tape however, covered the girls mouth and the child died of asphyxiation.
The mother sued the District Court and lost and also sued to have the custody hearing for the second living daughter to be made public, but the state opposed it. As far as is known the younger daughter is still in the foster care system even though charges have still not been brought against her mother for any wrong-doing.
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={E663FC99-895B-4CC3-A20B-B6AC1D7C9E63}

In 2006, in Lexington, Massachusetts two sets of parents tried to opt-out their 3 minor children from reading or studying of certain materials which they found offensive to their religious convictions. The Dept. of Education and the Lexington School District were introducing homosexual-themed literature to even the youngest elementary school children, which the plaintiffs feared would harm the moral training of their children in traditional Judeo-Christian values. The court found that "the Constitution does not compel the defendants.. to permit the Parkers and Wirthlins to exempt their children from teaching about homosexuality or same-sex marriage," because the Court was worried that it "could send the message that gays, lesbians, and children of same-sex parents (sic) are inferior and, therefore, have a damaging effect on those students." Currently the courts feel "Parents do have a fundamental right to raise their children," but those who enroll their children in public schools "abandon that responsibility to the state."
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={21351315-D12C-435B-B553-B1267BF782CB}

In November of 2008 in California, a young Mom in a moment of mental instability caused by postpartum depression and mind-altering pesticide poisoning, took her 9 month old infant to a local country club and left him on the golf course. The mother waited from a hidden location to make sure the baby was discovered by a passerby before slipping away. Her husband when learning of all his wife had done immediately called the police, expecting to be able to pick up his son. Instead, the baby was handed over to the county's Child Services department and the father was given a court date. There were no allegations that either he or his wife had done anything criminal against their son. On the court date the judge ruled that the boy remain in state custody pending a later trial, as this was "in the best interest of the child." Since then the court has moved to terminate the father's parental rights. This would free them to adopt the boy to another family, receiving thousands of federal dollars along the way.
http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={6BA8FA31-0CFC-415E-93B4-E8946739FA0D}

*Here's the HSLDA article:*
Home School Legal Defense Association urges all of its members to immediately telephone both U.S. senators from your state to oppose the nomination of David Ogden.

The most important reason to oppose Ogden’s nomination is his belief that the rules found in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child are already binding on the United States under the doctrines of international law.

In the Supreme Court case of /Roper v. Simmons/, 543 U.S. 551 (2005), Ogden argued in a brief that the rules banning the juvenile death penalty contained in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child were customary norms of international law “binding on all states.”

For background information on this doctrine, see Michael Farris’ article, “A Deeper Understanding of the Threat of International Law” in the November/December 2007 /Home School Court Report/.