Campaign Why





Family First Foundation – defending family rights – support the family



Family FirstWhy The International Campaign for the Family

 

The following are some examples of the international anti-family movement across the globe.

 

Children are the Targets, and Parents are Often Viewed as the Enemy  

As our families are weakened, so is society. Anti-family forces are active at the international level and in almost every country of the world promoting their anti-parent, anti-child agenda.

 

FIRST: There are many examples of how federal, state, and international  policies and programs are undermining the family. Today, we see an ever-increasing effort to replace the role of parents in the rearing of their children. Activist groups are joining with governments to mandate day care as the best cradle for our children. We witness how misguided population control measures are having destructive and far-reaching consequences on children, family and society.

 

For example, the United Nations, with substantial monetary awards, supported the deadly One-child Population Program of the People’s Republic of China, where it has been illegal to have a brother or sister. This has led to one child caring for four grandparents and has forced untold millions of brutal third-trimester abortions.

It is estimated that more than 650,000 Chinese girls become victims of infant killings annually in order to perpetuate the family name and to assure a son as a caregiver for parents in their old age. This brings the total number of baby girls killed to more than 17,000,000. Being born a girl is punishable by death. And as a result today, China even admits it has 78,000,000 adult males who will never marry because of a severe shortage of women. This number is likely to increase and will cause even more far-reaching social ills.

SECOND: Many policies, programs, laws, and treaties liberalize children’s rights to the point of robbing them of their innocence and virtue. Children are the victims of social engineering that exposes them to premature sexual activity and glamorizes alternative sexual lifestyles.

Since 2001, the British government has worked overtime to legalize access by girls, as young as eleven, to an untested, German-made, morning-after pill. The pill is not only available over-the-counter in thousands of British pharmacies without parental consent or notification, but it is distributed free to young girls in selected public school districts in Northern England.

THIRD: One of the most destructive influences on today’s families is pornography, which is having a detrimental effect on children’s values and a father’s commitment to marriage & family. When business and society will not regulate obscenity, public policy must be implemented to protect the innocence and virtue of children.

Tragically, governments often look away when businesses victimize children with pornography and obscenity. The leading American retailer, Abercrombie & Fitch, used blatant sexuality in an effort to appeal to adolescents. Their reasoning was simple and perverse – teenagers are pre-occupied with sex and business makes more money if their marketing is targeted to a teenager’s sexual appetites.

Even Christmas is not sacred. In their 2003 Christmas catalog entitled "Naughty but Nice," Abercrombie & Fitch featured an interview with a porn star and forty-five explicit portrayals of sexual imagery in the first 120 pages.

This sexually explicit catalog became a public policy issue when the attorney general of Michigan, Jennifer Granholm, threatened an obscenity prosecution, and the Lt. Governor of Illinois, Corinne Wood, called for a consumer boycott.

Children in the Cross Hairs: The Rights of Parents  

International social engineers, redefining "children’s rights," seek to reduce or eliminate the guidance traditionally provided by parents.

 

In their minds, children have become "miniature adults," and parents are an inconvenient obstacle to social progress. International negotiations fervently debate the extension of "rights," "privacy," "religion," "access to information" and "sexual expression" for children as young as 12.

 

It is no great surprise that parental rights have eroded significantly. In a recent ruling in Belgium, mothers and fathers who have the temerity to send their children to religious instruction, including daily or weekly scripture study, may face public inquiries into their "parental fitness."

 

Gender as a Social Construct: Motherhood as a Harmful Stereotype  

While our children have been reconstructed into mini-adults, fundamental notions of motherhood, fatherhood, marriage and family life have undergone radical change.

 

In international law, "male" and "female" have become terms without any – except negative – content. Instead, "gender" is substituted as a "social construct" that can be altered at whim. The results are extraordinary and far-reaching. For example, "marriage" has no necessary relation to maleness, femaleness, sexual complementarity or the biological imperative of childbearing.

 

Such efforts at social reconstruction have gone too far. The Convention to Eliminate All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), for example, has a praiseworthy goal: the elimination of sexually-based oppression of women.

 

But, in the quest of this laudable goal, the Committee charged with its enforcement routinely labels "motherhood" as a "harmful traditional stereotype," and "calls upon" all nations to ensure that children are in full-time day care before the age of three. Must the world eliminate motherhood to ensure justice? Of course not.

 

The UN’s Anti-Family Agenda  

The above are only a few prominent examples of the global reconstruction of family life. In addition:

 

Government-funded abortion is declared a universal human right that must be provided by developing countries in order to receive UN financial support.

Natural marriage is condemned as male sexual domination of women, while (at the same time) this venerable institution is redefined as any consensual sexual union.

Religious traditions (particularly those dealing with human sexuality) are decried as "harmful traditional practices" ripe for elimination.

The exercise of national sovereignty over the definition & punishment of criminal behavior is described as regressive and unenlightened.

 

 

What is The International Campaign for the Family?

Who is Leading The International Campaign for the Family?

How Can You Make A Difference For Good In The World?