Nicole Richie & Joel Madden Expecting Baby # 2

We’ve been seeing lots of Nicole Richie and 1-year-old Harlow Winter Kate these days. The adorable tot is dressed in purple above as she and her mama return to LA on Friday.

The mother-daughter duo have been seen in NYC shopping for a new apartment. As it turns out, they were likely searching for a bigger home to accommodate their second baby! Proud papa Joel Madden just announced that they are expecting their second child:

“What’s better than winning an Oscar? I am so happy to tell everyone that Harlow is going to be a big sister! God has truly blessed my family. Hope your all feeling as good as i am right now.”

Congratulations to the Richie-Madden family!

Photo: Fame

Filed under: Harlow Madden,Joel Madden,Nicole Richie

31 Comments »»

Post a Comment

  1. Julia

    Waouh ! Congratulations to them :-)
    I’m thrilled for them, they seem to be such wonderful parents !
    I’m eager to see this new little face, I’m sure it gonna be a cute one (when we see Harlow…)

    Reply
  2. new

    congrats to the family. they are so cute together!

    Reply
  3. Janie

    Call me old fashioned, but they should get married!

    Reply
  4. kw

    Aww another gorgeous child I’m sure, Im so happy for them.

    Reply
  5. Moore

    I thought they would have gotten married already since Joel talked about being Christian and what not but I guess it doesn’t matter to people anymore. People make up their own morals these days.

    Reply
  6. Rinoa

    Wow, that’s great news! There wasn’t even any speculation. I’m totally shocked.

    I actually agree with what some of the posters are saying about them getting married. Because Joel has made it known that he is a devout Christian, their lifestyle is obviously in contradiction with the Bible. Just for record, I speak as someone who is non-religious.

    Reply
  7. Angie

    I think its refreshing to see a Hollywood couple that seems to have it together and value their child…soon to be children! Congrats to the family and I hope to see them make it last!

    Reply
  8. LaKesha

    How many of us aren’t living lives that are in contradiction to the Bible?

    Reply
  9. Moore

    Lakesha, your statement makes it sounds like it’s ok to deliberately live in sin which is what they are doing if you go by his beliefs. According to the Bible, which he has claimed to follow, you do not have children outside of marriage. Just because the first may have been an accident (I’m not saying she was cause I don’t know) that doesn’t mean it’s no big deal to continue that way.
    I try to live my life in accordance to my beliefs, the Bible. Nobody is perfect and I’ll never claim to be but if I say I believe something then my actions will match my words.

    Reply
  10. melanie

    you are all fussing over mess…

    CONGRATS to nicole and joel, even harlow!!

    Reply
  11. Sarita

    Personally I don’t see the value in marriage because it doesn’t guarantee anything. People get divorced so easily. But it is strange that he is being all religious and God has blesses us but not getting married. Maybe Nicole isn’t religious?

    Reply
  12. alexa madeline

    best wishes

    Reply
  13. Dea

    Great to see them evolve to become responsible, mature adults. Too bad her ex BFF Paris doesnt have that in her and I doubt she ever will. Paris will end up a sad, lonely woman someday..Congrats to both parents!

    Reply
  14. Lucia

    the bible also condones slavery in the old testament. not to mention what it says about women. and this is speaking as a christian.

    i believe all that matter is that they love each other and love their daughter with all her heart.

    Reply
  15. alexa madeline

    i cant see paris as a mom she is way into herself

    Reply
  16. Audrey

    My husband and I knew a couple who also didn’t feel the need to marry. But when he was killed in a car wreck, his parents got to plan his service, collect his so called personal property and as the apartment was rented in his name, out she went. And they were the next of kin so they got his company life insurance.

    Not everyone is wise enough to put all in their will, if they have one. Afterall, Heath Ledger never even got around to updating his will.

    That little piece of paper helps protect the loved one.

    Reply
  17. shirilicious

    Besides the things Aubrey mentioned, that little piece of paper is for many people more than just that. It means you’re taking your relationship to a level where you are making it a public statement to love and be with that very person. It’s a vow not only made in between your own walls but in front of public. Yes, people do get divorced, but that’s not the point when people marry. After all, it’s much easier to just pack your bags and leave in a non-marital partnership.

    Reply
  18. Lucia

    First of all, the Heath Ledger defense does not work, but he and Michelle Williams were not together at the time of his death, which would mean that they would have gotten a divorce, and Heath would still be left out in the cold.

    As for planning the service and life insurance, there are many other ways around that without getting married.

    I just don’t see the point. Why do they need to show the public anything? They do not owe anyone anything.

    Reply
  19. Audrey

    Heath didn’t update his will. Remember his parents inherited, not Mathilda. They could have legally kept every dime.

    If you are not going to marry, then buy all means have a will to protect those you love.

    Reply
  20. Lucia

    heath not changing his will was completely unrelated to his not getting married. his relationship with matilda was as legally binding as his relationship with his father. he could have gotten married and not changed his will as well. Then his father still would have inherited. It would not have mattered.

    You are all assuming they haven’t taken precautions. The truth is, it is more likely that they have taken precautions. Heath was the exception, and like i said, he would have been divorced at the time of his death so it would not have mattered.

    Reply
  21. Marina

    Oh and I suppose all of you who say that they should get married because the bible says to spend all your time when you are on your period in a tent in the backyard because you are too dirty to go in the house? Because the bible says that too.

    And yes, it does condone slavery.

    Reply
  22. Moore

    I will apologize for hijacking this thread but since Lucia and Marina mentioned it, nowhere in the Bible is it, slavery, actually condoned. Regulations/laws regarding a behavior does not equal approval of such behavior.
    Marina your example of having your period and being unclean was for those living in that time. Just as they were not to eat certain things, they were not to do certain things under their law. They also didn’t have access to Target and pads and Jesus who brought new law in the new testament, for lack of a better phrase.
    Children still come after marriage biblicaly speaking which takes us back to the original argument of the post. He said he was a Christian so those of us who had read or heard that are just wondering why he didn’t go for it instead of having another baby.

    Reply
  23. Lucia

    Actually in the Old Testament God specifically says that women are unclean. And suggestions about what to eat and what not to eat certainly were not suggestions, they were guidelines on getting into Heaven. As was cutting your hair. Apparently men who do not shave can’t get into Heaven. Go figure!

    Are you just following the New Testament word for word? Because last time I checked it was all still the Bible. How do you determine what were guidelines for the time and what were guidelines for today?

    Who are you people to judge them by some of rules of the Bible, but not others.

    And he said he was Christian. I am a very faithfilled Christian, and I think most of the Bible is codswollop in my opinion. I 100 percent respect those of you who follow it, but the entire book is filled with inconsistency after inconsistency. Being Christian does not necessarily mean you follow the teachings of a specific church. If he did, then he would most likely have specified. But he did not say Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.

    Think about it.

    Reply
  24. Moore

    1 – No I am not following just the new testament. I brought out the old testament because that is basically where you seemed to be referring. Believing something does not mean picking and choosing which part to believe, which parts are true. I said I believe the Bible not half of it.

    2 – Where did I say that the Bible didn’t say a woman was unclean or that a law is a suggestion? I said that was that time and their law. You pointed out that that was the way to get into Heaven. Is it still? No it is not. New Testament and Jesus brought new ways. At the risk of speaking Christianese which I hate, at that time they were under the old covenant. That was changed. Just like they were not able to freely chat it up with God or buy tampons, women were viewed differently as was most practices. Some “old testament” Christians still hold that statement to be true and don’t cut their hair among other things. I don’t keep with those practices cause I don’t believe they will get me closer to God. Doesn’t mean that I don’t view the Old Testament as relevant. One cannot be viewed and fully understood without the other.

    3 – What other rules am I not judging him by? Honestly, I’d like to know. What else applies here? I could pick on his hair but that’s just cause I don’t like the side swept bangs in the picture on the side. Nothing to do with old testament law. I didn’t shun the poor kid with bad hair and I do still think that people pick their own morals. People think the same of me. Not a big deal.

    4 – The meaning of Christian is Christ like. Doesn’t matter the denomination. I never specified either. My assumption is that if you call yourself a Christian, you follow Christ as an example. I don’t hit that mark of the meaning nor do I expect myself to on the regular but I tend to personally believe that at the very least if you believe in something, state that you believe in something you try to take even the most basic principles to heart. One basic principle is that of marriage and sex. Of all those denominations that you mentioned sex before marriage is not a neglected subject and it most definitely not something that is taken lightly or encouraged since they are, to my understanding, following the teachings of Christ. Never said it doesn’t happen within these religious groups just that he could follow any of them and again from what I understand the principle is the same. No picking and choosing.

    Reply
  25. Moore

    Wow. Didn’t know that was that long. I’m not even going to go back and read that.

    Reply
  26. Lucia

    Being Christlike? Christ wasn’t married. I don’t know how you can use that as an argument . . .

    I repeat, who are you to decide what in the Bible was meant to be guidelines of the time and laws of the time, and what still holds true today?

    How can you say the marriage rules still hold true but the women being dirty isn’t?

    Reply
  27. Moore

    What you seem to not understand is the difference between the old and new testament and why the people of the old testament were commanded to behave in a certain way and why some of those ways are no longer necessary. That is why I can easily distinguish between what applies now and what doesn’t because it is written in the Bible. I would suggest that you go and read up on if you still don’t get it.

    Being Christ-like also means subscribing to his teachings. The word does have more than one definition. You can search that out as well.

    On the flip side, using the argument that Jesus wasn’t married doesn’t hold up either. He doesn’t command you to get married but he doesn’t praise sex before marriage. By his example, he didn’t leave baby Jesus’ running around. He didn’t have to be married and neither do you but if you’re going to have sex following his teachings it would be after marriage and therefore would lead to children. Had he been a father you can be sure he would have been married.

    Reply
  28. Lucia

    I’m just saying that you have no idea what Joel believes other than Jesus was the Son of God. That is all that you can get out of him saying he is a Christian. That does not mean you have to follow every individual thing in the Bible, as you yourself have admitted you don’t because you put more stock int he New Testament than the Old. That is your prerogative. He might put stock in other things besides the no sex before marriage thing. You have no right to judge either him or his actions, or saying he is going against what he believes. You don’t know what he believes. And no one has any right to judge anyone by their own morals because people’s morals are personal decisions. That is why we have free will.

    And I have read the Bible, multiple times, cover to cover. So believe me, I know what it says.

    Reply
  29. Moore

    “You yourself have admitted you don’t because you put more stock int he New Testament than the Old.”
    This statement shows that you still don’t understand everything that I have already mentioned so I’m not going to bother with it.

    Considering the info I’ve gotten a while back from interviews with them it’s more than just a belief that Jesus is the Son of God. Even some Atheists believe that which does not at all mean you’re a Christian. I am not assuming they believe something just as you are assuming that I don’t know something. I’m going by what has been said not only about his beliefs but his intentions. No I don’t know his heart and never claimed to but I know of what has come directly from him and it was more than just the phrase “I am a Christian.”

    He is a public figure therefore what he puts out to the public can be questioned. It’s his problem if he’s going to pick and choose through his beliefs but I have the right to wonder just as I would with anyone else who claims to believe a certain thing whatever it might be.

    Reply
  30. Moore

    P.S.

    What I should also have mentioned is that I’m done with this conversation. This dead horse of a thread has been beaten long enough. Feel free to reply but I’ve already explained my stance time and again so there’s nothing more I need to say. I have no problem being questioned or challenged and I stand by all my statements whether they are understood, agreed with or not.

    Reply
  31. Lucia

    Being a public figure does NOT mean people have the right to completely tear apart every decision they make, but if you feel you should be so judgmental of people you do not even know, I feel sorry for you.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>