Cousin of Queen Elizabeth II Says Abortion a Form of Eugenics

Lord Nicholas Windsor, the first cousin of Queen Elizabeth II, is creating a stir in England today with a new opinion piece in the London Telegraph newspaper calling abortion a form of eugenics.

Windsor said his commitment to opposing abortion originated in his realization that an abortion means the destruction of a human being, saying, “the cost [of abortion] is too high because the cost is paid in innocent human life.” In a critique of the 1967 Abortion Act in The Daily Telegraph, he states, “It hit me in the stomach that terminating a pregnancy equaled none other than the destruction of a human being. It knocked the wind out of me the first time, as it does every single time I think about it.”

“Abortion is perceived as a solution to a problem called unwanted pregnancy. A real problem, then. A real “solution”, too. But it’s not a just solution for all concerned. It leaves out of the picture the consequences for “the entity”, about whose nature we’ve disagreed so passionately in the last decades,” he writes.

“Look at it this way: I was born in 1970. My dear mother would have been within her rights to find it inconvenient to have me. Bad luck, she didn’t. But my generation has had a close shave. Whether we were born depended on lots of factors: not just on a mother’s decision, but also on the fathers’ influence and that of the surrounding culture,” he continued. ” Others of my generation weren’t that fortunate, and some of those were our siblings. That’s why we take this thing seriously, if you want to know. We were the first generation that really were vulnerable in the womb. Surely, the womb should be the safest place in the world to be. Not any more.”


Abortionists want freeddom of expression but do not like pro-lifers to tell things the way they want.
Abortionists do not like strong words, they want sweet talk.
Abortionists do not like to be shown the result of sbortions in photos.
Abortionists do not like comparisons. When we know that Japan has 2 million abortions a day, we look for another slaughters and compare. Even the word slaughter is too much of abortionists.
Abortionists are nor abortionists: the are pro-choice.
Abortionists are pro the choice of the mother but ther are not pro the choice of the baby. They could let live the baby and put a gun into his hand and let him decidewhether he wanted life or death.
Abortionists talk about foetus, bunch of cells, but never talk about babies.
Abortinoists throw bombs but get irritated when described the consequences of the explosions.
Abortionists are alcoholics like I read in a report fo an ex-abortionists, to forget the pain and guilt that is inside them.
That is why abortionists never last for life. Many turn back from the road thwy are walking into when they cannot stomach any more the nauseating sight of what they see everyday.

San Jose Articles

Article 1. As a matter of scientific fact a new human life begins at conception.

Article 2. Each human life is a continuum that begins at conception and advances in stages until death. Science gives different names to these stages, including zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, child, adolescent and adult. This does not change the scientific consensus that at all points of development each individual is a living member of the human species.

Article 3. From conception each unborn child is by nature a human being.

Article 4. All human beings, as members of the human family, are entitled to recognition of their inherent dignity and to protection of their inalienable human rights. This is recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other international instruments.

Article 5. There exists no right to abortion under international law, either by way of treaty obligation or under customary international law. No United Nations treaty can accurately be cited as establishing or recognizing a right to abortion.

Article 6. The Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW Committee) and other treaty monitoring bodies have directed governments to change their laws on abortion. These bodies have explicitly or implicitly interpreted the treaties to which they are subject as including a right to abortion.

Treaty monitoring bodies have no authority, either under the treaties that created them or under general international law, to interpret these treaties in ways that create new state obligations or that alter the substance of the treaties.

**Accordingly, any such body that interprets a treaty to include a right to abortion acts beyond its authority and contrary to its mandate. Such *ultra vires ***acts do not create any legal obligations for states parties to the treaty, nor should states accept them as contributing to the formation of new customary international law.

Article 7. Assertions by international agencies or non-governmental actors that abortion is a human right are false and should be rejected.

There is no international legal obligation to provide access to abortion based on any ground, including but not limited to health, privacy or sexual autonomy, or non-discrimination.

Article 8. Under basic principles of treaty interpretation in international law, consistent with the obligations of good faith and pacta sunt servanda, and in the exercise of their responsibility to defend the lives of their people, states may and should invoke treaty provisions guaranteeing the right to life as encompassing a state responsibility to protect the unborn child from abortion.

Article 9. Governments and members of society should ensure that national laws and policies protect the human right to life from conception. They should also reject and condemn pressure to adopt laws that legalize or depenalize abortion.

Treaty monitoring bodies, United Nations agencies and officers, regional and national courts, and others should desist from implicit or explicit assertions of a right to abortion based upon international law.

When such false assertions are made, or pressures exerted, member states should demand accountability from the United Nations system.

Providers of development aid should not promote or fund abortions. They should not make aid conditional on a recipient’s acceptance of abortion.

International maternal and child health care funding and programs should ensure a healthy outcome of pregnancy for both mother and child and should help mothers welcome new life in all circumstances.

We — human rights lawyers and advocates, scholars, elected officials, diplomats, and medical and international policy experts — hereby affirm these Articles.

San Jose, Costa Rica

March 25, 2011

Nicholas Windsor is of course a convert to the Church, having been received into it in 2001. Although there are rather more Catholic members of the British Royal Family than you might at first think. Although of course Nicholas Windsor is only a very minor royal to be fair. As a side note he married his wife, who is a Countess with Italian and Croatian heritage) in the Vatican.

Abyssinia, many, many thanks to you for your informative news posts.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit