Friday, July 29, 2011

Two Good WSJ Editorials That Are Pro-Baby

There is nothing so heartening as reading this sort of editorial with my morning coffee!

Life and Faith in Hell's Kitchen
William McGowan writes about the Sisters of Life and their ministry to help unwed mothers in NYC.
Safe, legal and rare" has long been the pro-choice mantra, but these days it applies less and less to the reality of abortion. In New York City, officials reported this year that 41% of pregnancies end in abortion—double the national rate. In the black community, the figure is 60%.

Numbers like these motivate the Sisters of Life, a small order of nuns celebrating its 20th anniversary this summer. The sisters take traditional vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, but they also take a fourth vow "to protect and enhance the sacredness of human life." According to Archbishop Timothy Dolan, once the sisters connect with unwed pregnant women in need, "the battle is half over."
Of Beckhams and Babies
Shortly after Mrs. Beckham gave birth [to her fourth child] this month, Mr. Ross [the chief executive of the British nonprofit group Population Matters] told Britain's Observer that "The Beckhams, and others like London Mayor Boris Johnson, are very bad role models with their large families. There's no point in people trying to reduce their carbon emissions and then increasing them 100% by having another child."
This Review & Outlook editorial is brief but positive about putting Mr. Ross in his place.

Note: if the links turn out to go to stories for subscribers only, try finding the article in Google (the headlines are those of the editorials). It should let you in through the Google link. That's how I found 'em.

3 comments:

  1. The nerve of someone telling you not to have more children. That Beckham story hit a nerve. The Beckhams can certainly afford the children. And given that Europeans are going extinct from lack of reproduction you would think that an organization called Population Matters would be endorsing the opposite position.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tante Leonie7/30/11, 1:38 PM

    I've never had much time for the Beckhams, but I have to say that their having four children (and Becks has recently said they want another one) has increased my opinion of them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Someone in the comments box for the article pasted the Beckham's press release in response, which I think you'll enjoy:

    "We thank all those who've extended their warm wishes and congratulations on the birth of our fourth child, Harper Seven. She is a darling child, the apple of our eye and our fondest hope is she'll grow to be a good, loving and productive adult perhaps one day to make an historic contribution to the benefit of mankind.

    To those who feel she represents a dire threat to the "environment" we say we understand and feel your concern. One need only look at themselves to see how the balance of consumption of natural resources against the creation of wealth, security and sustenance to others works out. To those who claim leadership in that movement and thus voice the gravest concern we say leadership is best exercised by example. Harper Seven represents the future which will come no matter what but forty-something year old self-annointed "leaders" the approaching past. To the Simon Ross' of the world we respectfully suggest that if you believe man to be the gravest and vilest threat to the planet you could make no better statement, no better example nor commit no nobler act than to lead the way by voluntarily checking out and making room for tomorrow."

    'nuff said!

    ReplyDelete