The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #261  
Old 10-14-2011, 05:16 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
My problem is still that if you take the view that 'A preference for male children and the exclusion from the line of succession because a member of the family marries a Catholic' is discriminatory and out of step with today's society etc, you then open a can of worms regarding whether the whole idea of a monarchy is 'discriminatory and out-of-step' with the idea that the UK is striving to be a Meritocracy...and thus that a monarchy has NO place in today's society, based on inherited position and accident of birth etc etc........

Only my thoughts,

Alex
__________________

  #262  
Old 10-14-2011, 05:54 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,256
Monarchy is discriminatory by its very nature, but so are other institutions. I don't want to start a religious war but the Roman Catholic Church could also be called discriminatory....women cannot be priests, non-Catholics cannot become Pope, priests who wish to marry must leave the priesthood. In America they always say that anyone can grow up to become President but that really isn't true, you have to be born a US citizen, generally go to the right universities and as it stands now be able to raise in excess of a billion dollars. The world is filled with inequalities and discrimination.

JMO
Nicholas
__________________

  #263  
Old 10-14-2011, 08:08 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: brisbane, Australia
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Monarchy is discriminatory by its very nature, but so are other institutions. I don't want to start a religious war but the Roman Catholic Church could also be called discriminatory....women cannot be priests, non-Catholics cannot become Pope, priests who wish to marry must leave the priesthood. In American they always say that anyone can grow up to become President but that really isnt true, you have to be born a US citizen, generally go to the right universities and as it stands now be able to raise in excess of a billion dollars. The world is filled with inequalities and discrimination.

JMO
Nicholas
Whike i gree that the world is full of inequalities, the Americab President is not the best example. After all, to be King you have to be born to a certain person and is limited to only a few dozen or do. To be Us President, any of the 100 million people born in the US, could conceviably overxome the other obstacles and become President.
  #264  
Old 10-14-2011, 09:01 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by fearghas View Post
Whike i gree that the world is full of inequalities, the Americab President is not the best example. After all, to be King you have to be born to a certain person and is limited to only a few dozen or do. To be Us President, any of the 100 million people born in the US, could conceviably overxome the other obstacles and become President.
Perhaps but if you are a naturalized US citizen, no matter what else you achieve in life you are constitutionally barred from becoming President. That is discrimination and creates 2 classes of US citizens.
  #265  
Old 10-15-2011, 08:12 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,275
Her Majesty is not opposed to the idea, according to The Telegraph.

Queen backs plan to let daughter of Prince William and Kate Middleton to accede to the throne - Telegraph
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
  #266  
Old 10-15-2011, 08:22 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,487
I'm somewhat suspect about HM "letting this be made known." The Queen doesn't voice her opinions on political matters, even if they involve her own family. Or perhaps even especially if they involve her own family.
  #267  
Old 10-15-2011, 09:32 PM
Daria_S's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: My own head, United States
Posts: 7,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
I'm somewhat suspect about HM "letting this be made known." The Queen doesn't voice her opinions on political matters, even if they involve her own family. Or perhaps even especially if they involve her own family.
Then perhaps we're once again being misinformed by the media. Not surprising.
__________________
"My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring".
~Prince William~


I'm not obsessed with royalty...I just think intensely about it.
  #268  
Old 10-15-2011, 10:55 PM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
While the article is interesting and exciting for the changes it talks about, I guess like anything else, we have to wait for a formal announcement from the government regarding any implemented changes. But, wow! Imagine Princess Anne leapfrogging ahead of her younger brothers in the succession.......
  #269  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:26 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
So, what legal processes have to occur for the change to equal succession to take place?

And it would it be certain that the change was retroactive (affecting Princess Anne)?

Anyway, fascinating to think about and makes me happy it's been considered. It should be seen as a tribute to the excellent of the current monarch, who has proved that a woman is more than able to be a regent. Some of it may indeed come from being the firstborn.
  #270  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:26 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,487
And/or the media could be pushing the agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daria_S View Post
Then perhaps we're once again being misinformed by the media. Not surprising.
  #271  
Old 10-15-2011, 11:33 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,324
It seems it's Cameron's people who say the Queen is in favor of it:

Queen backs the plan.

Telegraph is not a tabloid, is it?

So it could also be the case that the Queen is in favor of it. Why wouldn't she be? Doesn't she have those private talks with the PM?
  #272  
Old 10-16-2011, 01:40 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 9,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baroness of Books View Post
While the article is interesting and exciting for the changes it talks about, I guess like anything else, we have to wait for a formal announcement from the government regarding any implemented changes. But, wow! Imagine Princess Anne leapfrogging ahead of her younger brothers in the succession.......

I doubt very much if any new proposal would suggest that. There is no need really.

This issue was raised, of course, when Diana was pregnant with William but as he was a boy it was shelved.
  #273  
Old 10-16-2011, 01:41 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,262
If the story in the Telegraph is correct, I think it's interesting that the changes will apparently apply to all descendants of the Queen. I wonder if Peter Phillips is just a little nervous knowing that he and Savannah will be two heartbeats away from the throne if the change goes through. (If it happens, he'll probably be a counsellor of state at least at the beginning of the next reign, too.)
  #274  
Old 10-16-2011, 02:10 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,060
Is the proposed change in succession retrospective? If so, wouldn't that practically remove William from any chance of becoming the King.
  #275  
Old 10-16-2011, 02:19 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,262
I haven't seen anything that says that it would alter it beyond the Queen's descendants. The first three places in the line of succession are the same if that change is made. (And any change that would remove William from his place would probably also depose the Queen, so it's really not probable at all.)
  #276  
Old 10-16-2011, 08:41 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,446
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 View Post
And/or the media could be pushing the agenda.
Think about it this way/

The issue/agenda goes up in front of all the lawmakers and its on record who voted how and what not.

Do you really think anyone in this day and age would vote NAY?

I think its an issue that would pass in a moment wherever it needs to be passed.

then they'll all go out and drink pink squirrels, bow down and chant MOO to the cow god beluah.

They could ignore the issue too and just go on vacation too.

What do I know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson View Post
I haven't seen anything that says that it would alter it beyond the Queen's descendants. The first three places in the line of succession are the same if that change is made. (And any change that would remove William from his place would probably also depose the Queen, so it's really not probable at all.)
I would imagine too that the decree would state "from this day forward" or similar. Enacted on the day it was decided on.
  #277  
Old 10-16-2011, 09:45 AM
NotAPretender's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: WPB FL/Muttontown NY, United States
Posts: 853
While I think this would be a pretty popular non-binding measure (equality! yeah! seriously, who would go up against that?), my impression is that execution would be awfully messy.
__________________
"Me, your Highness? On the whole, I wish I'd stayed in Tunbridge Wells"
  #278  
Old 10-16-2011, 09:50 AM
Baroness of Books's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bookstacks, United States
Posts: 5,772
So the line of succession, if enacted and retroactive, would be the Prince of Wales and his children (which would not have changed), then Princess Anne, Peter Phillips and his family, Zara and any future children of her marriage, Prince Andrew and family, Prince Edward and his family. I can imagine Peter having a bit of a shock knowing he's thisclose to the succession if there is a law implemented, and Mike Tindall as well. And I wouldn't think in this modern age that there would be naysayers, either, other than those grey suits who want to uphold tradition but they'd be wise to go along with the times.
  #279  
Old 10-16-2011, 11:42 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,374
It's not going to be retroactive, that's silly.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #280  
Old 10-16-2011, 12:00 PM
American Dane's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New York and Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 544
With the way Princess Anne goes about her business and then comparing that to current number 4 Andrew, I don't really see what's wrong with doing it retroactively JMHO. Obviously if it affected the heir and his heir that would be a problem but as it doesn't, I think Prince Philip would be quite pleased to see his beloved daughter and favourite grandson and granddaughter move up a few places. In regards to Peter and Zara then continuing with their current careers, only the HRH title confines them to royal life and not their position in succession.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rules of Succession CrownPrinceLorenzo Royalty Past, Present, and Future 96 03-25-2015 09:36 PM
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 942 03-09-2015 10:32 PM
Succession Issues ladybelline Imperial Family of Japan 921 11-03-2014 02:22 AM




Popular Tags
belgium best outfit carl philip crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events death fashion fashion poll funeral germany grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg maxima official visit ottoman picture of the week poland president gauck president hollande president komorowski prince carl philip prince daniel prince floris prince henrik princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess astrid princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess mary princess mette-marit princess of asturias queen fabiola queen letizia queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sonja royal royal fashion sofia hellqvist spain state visit stockholm sweden the hague visit wedding willem-alexander



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:44 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2015
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]