PRESS RELEASE 30 April 2015

(Embargo: 11am, Friday May 1st)

LAUNCH OF FIRST FAMILIES FIRST

The risk involved in the so-called Marriage
Equality Referendum relates to the changed
Constitutional definition of Family that will
arise from the amendment, says new No-to-theamendment campaigning group, First Families
First, proposing what it describes as an essential
amendment to safeguard children and families.
_________________________________________
First Families First is to be officially launched at a press conference in
Buswells Hotel, Molesworth Street, Dublin, at 11 am tomorrow, Friday,
1 May.
At its launch this Friday morning, First Families First, a new group
established to campaign against the amending of Article 41 of the
Constitution to provide for what is termed Marriage Equality, said that

the amendment as it stands would amount to an act of vandalism against

the Constitution.
First Families First has been established to defend the rights of existing
families married and unmarried or single parent against the hidden
consequences of the same-sex marriage amendment.
The campaigning group has been established by Kathy Sinnott, John
Waters and Gerry Fahey to promote, and advocate for a new, child and
parent-friendly amendment to the Constitution, which they say would
protect families against the effects of radical interference with other
aspects of the Constitution and recent legislation.
The group has been formed to oppose the particular measure being
supported/advocated by the Government, rather than the principle of
same-sex marriage, on which various members of First Families First
have different positions.
First Families First says that simply including a provision for same-sex
marriage into Article 41 of the Constitution will radically alter the
meaning of Family and Parenthood, and undermine the existing rights of
families and in particular the biological connections between parents and
children.
First Families First says that the same-sex marriage amendment on its
own will fatally undermine and render obsolete the criterion of genetic
and biological connection within the Constitutional definition of
parenthood, thus abolishing any relevance of natural procreation in
defining what a family is. If the same-sex marriage amendment is passed,
the group says, serious wrongs are likely to arise in future family court
proceedings arising from decision that are likely to be contrary to the best
interests of children as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of
the Child.
In time, this will inevitably set at naught the significance of a biological
connection between parent and child. In effect, says First Families First,
the amendment reduces the rights available under the existing definitions
of Family in pursuit of a greatly reduced and bogus form of equality
arising from an entirely altered definition of marriage.
First Families First proposes a further amendment to the Constitution to
protect the natural child-parent bond. Thegroupsaysthatthischangeis
essentialinviewoftheinteractionoftheChildrenRightsAmendment,

TheChildrenandFamilyRelationshipActandtheproposedMarriage
EqualityAmendment.
FirstFamiliesFirstopposesthecurrentGovernmentproposalforchange
toArticle41,believingthat,beforeanyfurtherchangesaremadetothe
constitutionalprovisionsinrespectofFamily,theinclusionofanew
sentencetoArticle40.3.1,takendirectlyfromtheUNConventiononthe
RightsoftheChild,isessentialtoprotectfamiliesandchildrenfromthe
dangerslikelytoarisefromthepassageofmeasuressuchasthesamesex
marriageamendment.
The change to Article 40.3.1 advocated by First
Families First is as follows (new section in italics):
40. 3.1
The State guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by
its laws to defend and vindicate the personal rights of the citizen. In
particular, the State shall respect the right of the child who is separated
from one or both of its biological parents to maintain personal relations
and direct contact with both parents.

Contact: firstfamiliesfirst@gmail.com

Ends