From the Desk

Three weeks ago, Prince William and his wife Kate Middleton, the duke and duchess of Cambridge, grabbed the world’s attention with their latest news. Prince George is going to be an older brother.

Almost immediately, news outlets from Europe and America latched on to the information, disseminating it to audiences enthralled with all things royal. Within minutes, #royalbaby was trending worldwide.

It is no surprise people responded so quickly to the latest news, especially given the fact that more than 20 million people in the U.S. alone viewed the royal wedding on television — an ocean away from where the ceremony took place. When news about Middleton’s first pregnancy came out, fans were just as enamored.

But it is not merely the news of the pregnancy that is interesting to me. It is the word attributed to the situation that is intriguing to me.

Four letters. B-A-B-Y.

Not royal fetus. Not royal blob of tissue. Not royal product of conception.
Baby.

All of a sudden, and once again, that thing inside the belly of the duchess is a baby. Nothing less.

Search-engine-generated results for news articles surrounding the couple’s pregnancy announcement all had at least those two words — “royal baby” — in common. Not a single search returned anything but “royal baby” when referring to the fourth member of this family.

Can you imagine a headline on the topic that reads, “Middleton pregnant with second royal blob of tissue?” No legitimate news outlet would actually refer to the duke and duchess’ smallest family member as anything other than “royal baby.” That would be insulting, embarrassing, rude and simply wrong.

And yet, so often when someone is pregnant, the word “baby” is not even used. It is a fetus. It is just tissue. It is not a person. Therefore, it is OK to get rid of it if it is unwanted, unplanned or too difficult.

Why does the whole world agree that Middleton is carrying a baby, and yet thinks every other person is carrying a non-person, non-baby thing in the womb? Why such a blatant double standard?

I would argue that there is no difference. A claim to the throne does notdetermine personhood.

While some may say that the use of one particular word is insignificant, it carries with it the whole idea of personhood and the resulting abortion arguments. The words we use matter. They can mean the difference between life and death in this case.

No one would ever dream of telling Middleton to abort her “clump of cells,” but for those who have no claim to royalty, it is more than OK to get rid of their “blob of tissue,” because it is not a baby at all.

Author Eric Metaxas summed up the issue well in his response to Middleton’s first pregnancy.

“The Brits are clearly — and rightly — treating the royal baby not as a clump of cells to be disposed of for any reason but as fully human, as a person,” Metaxas said. “Yes, friends, the language we use matters. Is the life in the womb a ‘product of conception’ or a person, maybe even a prince in waiting?”

BROWN is the editor-in-chief