Kate Middleton is with foetus

The New York Daily News used an expression that isn’t seen much these days: “with child”. The reason it isn’t is because we have become a society of casual aborters; we abort for convenience, birth control, greed – we don’t want to pay to raise a child -, selfishness, hedonism and solipsistic self-absorption.

Ideas are formed through language: we are reluctant to use language that might make us question our hell-bent determination to kill our unborn children and abort ourselves into extinction.

Good for the New York Daily News for swimming against the tide:

In recent days, Kate gave no sign of being with child as she kept up a busy schedule of royal appearances.

4 thoughts on “Kate Middleton is with foetus

  1. It’s probably safe to say there are selfish reasons involved in anything, including the decision to become a parent [consider Sir Elton]; or not to become one. Thus it is I know people who are great parents; just as I also know parents who are selfish, hedonistic and solipsistically self-absorbed people. Nonetheless, because it’s a complex calculus people make in these modern times to become parents, it is they rather than I who should render the calculations. I wish Kate and William well. And I say who wouldn’t have lots of children if the prospect included the extraordinary wealth and privilege, not to say fleets of attendants … Kate could give birth to 15 or 20 children none of whom, postpartum, she need ever see again … that will be available to them.

  2. Have you read Cranmer’s similar article (“Duke and Duchess of Cambridge have made a foetus”, 4 Dec., http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.co.uk/)? Selfishly wanting to be a parent, or not want to, are not the only alternatives. There is a third, which I recommend: You have to be certain in your mind that it’s not “MINE”, but God’s, person; God wants it (whoever/whatever it is/becomes).

Leave a Reply