A Constitutional, Conservative Yank Applauds the Royal Birth
Furthermore, the thirty-something Royals did it after entering into a life-long, connubial covenant — “holy matrimony” in layman’s parlance. No subjecting of family, friends — and in their unique case, the TV-viewing planet — to a wedding spectacle, with the bride incongruously decked out in symbolic white, while the couple’s six-month-old first-born — or second, or third born — scampers around her feet.
Vows first. Baby following. Again, hooray.
And I must add: it’s ironic a mere week after Great Britain’s parliament and Queen Elizabeth shamefully pronounced their benediction over English/Welsh homosexual “marriage”, Baby Prince officially entered a royal family consisting of mom and dad, one XX and one XY parent. Will and Kate accomplished a species-perpetuating feat which “Will and Nate” or “Willimena and Kate” could never naturally pull off.
A reminder of authentic marriage‘s uniqueness, one of its chief purposes, in living color. Do I need to say “Hooray” one more time?
And speaking of “gender” issues: how refreshing is it that, far as I could detect, there wasn’t the most vaporous whiff of disappointment when headlines blared the birth of a royal son, an infant boy.
Why the mild surprise? For decades, the misandrous meme has been: Men stink. Fathers, sons, husbands? — usually the problem. The hands-down stupidest family member in any commercial or sitcom, more often than not, is Dad. Boys in diapers, we’re endlessly instructed, probably will grow into obstreperous teenagers or brutish lugs who need to be corralled, medicated, demasculinized.
Not a congenial prospect.
By way of contrast, for Will and Kate and the regular folks cheering them on, this blessed — boy-centric — event brought undiluted jubilation. The child’s genitalia? Nothing to fret over. Turns out blue blankets, like pink, are reason to rejoice.
Needlessly self-evident observations? Not anymore they aren‘t. A national forebear of the Cambridges, a chap named George Orwell, once exhorted, ” “In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
Okay, I’ll concede: celebrating pregnancy and eschewing “feticide”? Guaranteeing that nuptials precede child-bearing? Modeling real marriage instead of its grotesque, same-sex simulacrum? Affirming the worth of little guys, not just little gals? Even in morally-muddled 2013, these might not fully qualify as “revolutionary” — at least not yet.
But we’re certainly heading in that direction.
And with the birth of little George, their Royal Highnesses, unintentionally I‘d guess, have posed a gently provocative challenge to the aforementioned, trendy nonsense.
So, here’s one constitutional, conservative American who’ll let it fly once more: Hooray, hooray!
Image: Town crier Tony Appleton, Suffolk, England, UK; author: Karen Roe; Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license
