Families First Babies

www.familiesfirst.uk.net

Childhood

Give the CHILDREN back their CHILDHOOD !

Childhood is supposed to be a time of innocence - without pressures, to be enjoyed before the worries and responsibilities of teenage and adulthood come along. In the last 20 years this innocence has been eroded, both by commercial interests (who want only to make money, and don't care if children are harmed) - and by a small minority of adults who work in the media and, for their own perverted agenda, want to "adultise" children. They are literally trying to turn children into adults at an earlier and earlier age - which keeps on going down. They do this through Television and by some things taught in the schools. As children come under more pressure - and without the emotional maturity to withstand it - the child suicide rate has shot up.

Britain a Baby-Safe Zone "the law in Britain treats unborn children ....
as if they were a part of their mother's bodies"
    The first nine months of a child's life - inside the womb - is supposed to be the safest place for them; tucked up nice and warm. In today's Britain this is the most dangerous time of their lives - as every day, perfectly healthy babies are cut out or sucked out, as if they were ulcers or "aliens", from their mothers' bodies. "Holocaust 2" - the cull of baby humans - has been going on for 35 years, not just in Britain, but all of Western Europe. It's not just a massacre of children and an abuse of women and teenage girls. It's also caused us a demographic disaster. The number of young adults of working-age in the population, is now too small to support the ever-growing number of old people. (Old people are living for longer. Pensions are not financed from their own past contributions, of course - but out of current taxes paid by the working population.)

So just when we need a rise in the birth-rate (for British mothers), it's still falling.

   Our current Law - incredibly - treats unborn children as part of their mothers' body. Of course they're certainly NOT (They often have a different blood-type from their mother and so are a biologically separate person.) They are full human beings in their own right. The baby and the mother, both have rights - we need to balance the rights of one against the other, to have a respect for all human life. We would bring in a new "Unborn Baby Protection Bill" to replace all previous legislation; allowing abortion only for genuine medical reasons. This allows the babies their Human Rights to KEEP THE LIFE THEY ALREADY HAVE.

Here's a tip on recognising people who de-humanise Unborn Children. They always use the "Foetus" word for babies, instead of calling them what they are: Babies.

Baby Mary.
Her Right to Life (like yours and mine), was respected. But for thousands of other babies in Britain each year, the moment of opening their eyes will never come....

An end to Same-Sex Adoption

New Labour quietly changed the law to let same-sex "couples" both adopt and foster children. Even though the general public is overwhelmingly against this. How can this possibly be in the child's interests ? Everyone knows PERFECTLY WELL, that children need a Mum and a Dad - not two Dads; not two mums.
We would ban ANY same-sex pair (even if they were just two normal men, or two normal women, living together) - from adopting or fostering.

   FAQs

Q. By wanting to end same-sex couples adopting, surely your party is homophonic?

A. No we're not 'frightened of homosexals" which is what that word means; I don't think anyone is scared of them, after all they can't help being the way they are.

Q. But doesn't this discriminate against them?

A. No, that's what the Coventry media said about Families First during the 2005 Election; they didn't read the website properly. We would ban ALL same-sex couples adopting - regardless of whether they were homosexical, or just pairs of normal people eg two brothers, two sisters, two friends; pairs who live together but don't share the same bed. What matters is what children NEED - which is to have parents of the OPPOSITE sex, not parents of the SAME sex.

TV - a Family Viewing Threshold ENFORCED BY LAW

There's SUPPOSED to be a "Family Viewing Threshold" of 9 p.m. That's too early and should be set at least to 10:00 p.m. because of the later time that young children are staying up. But the TV companies ignore it anyway. They show whatever they want; when they want. They know the worst that will happen is they'll be told off. No prosecution; no fine. A hard-core sex discussion shown at 2 a.m. was recently repeated at 3 in the afternoon - horrified mothers found their toddlers watching it. The TV company concerned, just said "Sorry", they had "put the wrong tape on." Another example:    "The Bill" (a police "drama" shown at 8 o'clock, when millions of small children are watching telly), recently showed a scene where two male policemen "kiss". (You and I know it was only simulated, but it looks real to children).

   We need a legally-enforced Family Viewing Threshold; set at 10 p.m. Breach of this would be a criminal, arrestable offence - with punishment on conviction, both for the company (with an enormous fine of between Ł9 million to Ł99 million); AND 6 months imprisonment for all directors of the television company involved. (Do these amounts seem over the top ? Some of these TV companies make that much in ONE WEEK ).

Many of the web-sites used by children on the Internet, openly encourage disobedience to their parents and teachers. Some of them tell children who log on, not to tell their parents when they go out, or where they are going to. They say that the two little girls who were murdered in Soham in Cambridgeshire, went onto the Internet earlier that day. Nobody will ever know now, if they went to one of these "child-disobedience" sites or not. But the fact is that they DID then leave home without telling their parents that they were going out; we all know the tragic consequences that followed.

    Adults who promote child sexual activity, (either between two children - or between a child and an adult) - are JUST AS MUCH "nonces", as the "dirty old man" in the scruffy raincoat. Nail these Nonces where it hurts, by charging them with "Child Sex Encouragement", and locking them up. And if the offender is a company rather than an individual - how about a new offence of "Corporate Nonceing" - with a fine of Ł9 million.

   Name and Shame the Politicians who want to criminalise parents smacking their children

"..if these politicians get their way, they'd make me and my wife into criminals
just because we want to bring our children up safe, sound and healthy."

  A group of MPs (led by David Hinchcliffe and Jean Corston) want the government to ban parents from smacking our children. Incredibly, they are using the Victoria Climbié case as the excuse. Instead of punishing the GUILTY, these politicians want to condemn all normal parents as abusers because we smack our children!
  The government probably has more sense than to interfere like this in family life, but it's frightening to think that there are some MPs who want to do this. It makes you wonder how these men and women get into Politics. Where do they come from? What planet have they been living on? They're so out of touch with ordinary people.
  A ban on smacking would not have saved Victoria; her killers were not interrogated until after she was already dead (because of cock-ups by the Police.) Anyway - she wasn't killed by her parents. If she'd stayed with them, she'd still be alive today.
  All parents smack their children sometime. For small children it's often the only - or the best - option. With an older child, you can punish in lots of other ways - "grounding", stopping pocket-money, and so on - or just explaining WHY something is wrong. With small children, you can't do that. If they won't let you strap them in the car-seat; try to run out in traffic; or try to play with electrical things, you can't start explaining about the laws of physics and voltages - you smack them! Nobody likes smacking. If you do it properly, it doesn't cause any physical pain; rather it hurts their pride!
  Over the years both me and my wife, have had to smack our children on occasions - like all parents. We know perfectly well that when we do it, it's not an "assault". It's just something you have to do, for the well-being and safety of your child. We do it dispassionately and without losing our temper. My In-laws are amazed - they laugh in disbelief - when I tell them that politicians here want to ban smacking. (My wife is from the West Indies, where the tradition among mums is to smack much often, and harder than in Britain. Interestingly children over there are much better behaved. That may or may not be a coincidence).

  If these dickhead politicians get their way, they would make me and my wife, and millions of other parents, into criminals - just because we're trying to bring our children up, safe and sound and healthy!

Commercial interests are more and more, exploiting children. Most worrying is the increase in selling - or advertising - through schools. In the past year we've been notified of several activities in our little girl's school, which seem totally innocuous at first. But when you dig a bit deeper, you find that somebody is out to make some money from the children. The "School Photo" a good example. This should be done by the school, and parents charged the cost price only. Instead, commercial photographers come in, and take the photos as a commercial venture.
   Even charities now organise collections, using schoolchilren. Charities do a good job - but if they want my money, they should stop me in the street and ask for ut - NOT give a little collection bag to my child in her classroom.
   But the worst exploitation is children's football-kit club strip. These all have commercial logos on - for Adidas, Carlsberg, Umbro or whatever. Children who wear them, are doing these companies' advertising for them. They should be paid for this - instead, the children have to buy these shirts, and they're very expensive.
   We would force clubs to GIVE AWAY FREE, any children's football strip, if it displayed a commercial logo.

K-I-D-S and the Media

   You can always tell the people in the media who don't really understand children's interests:
they're still using the old-fashioned "K-I-D-S" word. No, please, not any more!
  "Kids" are baby goats. Young humans are called "Children".

"Babies need Both"

    New Labour is carrying on the "Creche culture" of the Tories - trying to send single mothers out to work, while other people are employed to look after their children. Anyone knows the place for all young children to be, is with their own mother - not with somebody else's mum. If we want to improve the lot of Britain's single mothers, we should be finding them husbands - not creches. This gives the family a much bigger income; also it's well-known that children of single-parents perform much worse at school, and are more likely to truant and delinquent. Every child needs a Mother AND a father. Babies need Both.

    FAMILIES FIRST Childhood Policies

      Reform of the Abortion Laws to leave unborn babies alive, unless there is a genuine MEDICAL reason for destroying the child.

      Stop same-sex couples adopting children.

      A legally-enforced "Family Viewing Threshold" for evening TV.

     Increase Child Benefit, and back-date benefit 9 months, to the beginning of the child's life. A campaign through the schools and television, aimed at young girls, to raise the status of Motherhood in our society.

   End pre-adoption controls by local councils. The present situation where couples have to wait ten years, fill in forms, get interviewed, undergo training courses, and then have to find a baby with a "colour match" to their own skin-colour, is unacceptable. We would allow any normal married couple to "self-adopt" a baby; registering it afterwards with the authorities, the same as a birth. (Obviously you'd need safeguards so paedophiles or perverts couldn't try it on.)

    A new offence of "Child Sex Encouragement" - to cage grown-ups who push children into sexual activity, through the Internet,   TV,     magazines or classroom.

    Name, Shame, SACK the social workers, whose incompetence leads to the death of children in their care.

     Close down the child-sex web-sites .

     EQUALISATION of Women's and Men's parenting rights after divorce.

     Reduce the availability of cigarettes and alchohol, to children. Police officers would be able to confiscate cigarettes and alchohol from children in public places, who appeared to be under 16. Supermarkets which sell alchohol on their shelves, would have to wrap them in large, tamper-proof packs, too large to fit inside a coat. It would be illegal to stock single cans or bottles on shelves, outside of special "alcho-zones" with shelves out of reach of the public.

     Ban ALL commercial exploitation of children. In particular Outlaw the SELLING of children's football kit, if it displays a commercial logo. They would have to be GIVEN AWAY FREE.

K-I-D-S and the Media You can always tell the people in the media who don't really understand children's interests: they're still using the old-fashioned "K-I-D-S" word. No, please, not any more! "Kids" are baby goats. Young humans are called "Children". "Babies need Both"

K-I-D-S and the Media

You can always tell the people in the media who don't really understand children's interests:
they're still using the old-fashioned "K-I-D-S" word. No, please, not any more!
"Kids" are baby goats. Young humans are called "Children".

"Babies need Both"