The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #941  
Old 01-07-2013, 07:57 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by EIIR View Post
The idea that a Queen regnant is always inferior to a King is just absurd. QEII towers over every monarch in Europe, if not the world, in my opinion, despite being female and rather diminutive in physical stature. I know she's got longevity on her side, but there's probably only one monarch in the world who could get all the other monarchs in one room - Queen Elizabeth II.
Agreed. She's set a very high bar for her successors.

Elizabeth I comes to mind as well.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #942  
Old 01-07-2013, 08:28 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,367
Let's get back on topic.
__________________

__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #943  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:33 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by angieuk View Post

I love the 1700's it was my favourite time period.
Yes, I especially loved the part about slavery.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #944  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:35 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
The reality of the life of the wealthy and privileged would be a rude awakening as well.
Which is why I've always enjoyed watching "The 1900's House" and "The Manor House" reality shows. Take ordinary people and place them in an Edwardian era home. I especially loved on the "1900's House" the episode which showed the production company searching for a London area home which could be turned back in time and refitted for that era. Finding the artifacts to use for housekeeping, cooking etc...took the producers months. The health inspectors who arrived pronounced the place a death trap by 21st century standards.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #945  
Old 01-07-2013, 09:38 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by casualfan View Post

Yes, I especially loved the part about slavery.
I just want to point out that I am being sarcastic. The fact is, brown people like me were enslaved by the million. They were sexually assaulted, cheated out of billions of dollars worth of their hard-earned wages, and there are several scholars who would make a convincing argument that they were the victims of a genocide.

Angieuk, I know this isn't what you were thinking about when you brought up the 1700s, but I hope you would consider the ramifications of your reasoning.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #946  
Old 01-07-2013, 10:24 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 2,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by casualfan View Post
I just want to point out that I am being sarcastic. The fact is, brown people like me were enslaved by the million. They were sexually assaulted, cheated out of billions of dollars worth of their hard-earned wages, and there are several scholars who would make a convincing argument that they were the victims of a genocide.

Angieuk, I know this isn't what you were thinking about when you brought up the 1700s, but I hope you would consider the ramifications of your reasoning.
I'm right there with you. Her post was quite honestly one of the more perplexing things I've ever read on the Royal Forums. I can't imagine why any woman would ever long for a time period when women lacked all basic rights.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #947  
Old 01-07-2013, 11:45 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Alamos, United States
Posts: 1,034
Speaking of early homes in London, I was in one on Harley St. which was a medical office. It was kept by law looking more or less as it was in the eighteenth century. It was four stories, none of the stories wide, and one can imagine the poor maids clambering up and down those four stories. It had a scales on which the patient sat, which was preserved from the eighteenth century. It's one thing I don't like about Downton/Highclere, that the maids had to clamber up and down so much, and live in the attic in the real Highclere, as shown in the video last night in the USA
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #948  
Old 01-08-2013, 06:19 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,178
Royal Succession Laws to Be Rushed out
Quote:
New laws to ensure the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's baby accedes to the throne even if it's a girl will be rushed out within two weeks.

The royal couple are currently expecting their first child together and the British government are keen to get the succession laws - which currently see a male child take preference over any female siblings regardless of age - changed before he or she arrives.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #949  
Old 01-08-2013, 09:22 AM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
I understand that there are some high tech tests out there now that can tell you gender, along with some abnormalities fairly early - like 9-10 weeks, where we all used to have to wait until about 18 weeks, and sometimes longer.

Could they know something we don't?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #950  
Old 01-08-2013, 11:32 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I understand that there are some high tech tests out there now that can tell you gender, along with some abnormalities fairly early - like 9-10 weeks, where we all used to have to wait until about 18 weeks, and sometimes longer.

Could they know something we don't?
They could, but it's unlikely that the new laws are going to be rushed through 14 parliaments in two days.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #951  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:23 PM
Excalibur's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
They could, but it's unlikely that the new laws are going to be rushed through 14 parliaments in two days.
I don't think that is the intention here. My take on the "rush" article is that it will be rushed through the British parliament in the two-weeks timeframe. If I understand correctly, the other parliaments cannot even consider the legislation unless/until it is passed by the British parliament. So this is the "jump-start" to get things moving.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #952  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:28 PM
ZaJa's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York , United States
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elenath View Post
Funny how people say they would love to live in a certain century and how the things were done so much better back then. I always wonder if they would still feel that way after a few years in that time. We women are used to so much freedom and rights we often take it for granted. Having a job, getting married to whom ever we wanted, going wherever we want, owning property and money, the right to vote (or not), etc, etc. Women didn't have those things in the 1700...
Being African American I can def say I would not want to live in the 1700s lol !
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #953  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:49 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
I don't think that is the intention here. My take on the "rush" article is that it will be rushed through the British parliament in the two-weeks timeframe. If I understand correctly, the other parliaments cannot even consider the legislation unless/until it is passed by the British parliament. So this is the "jump-start" to get things moving.
I agree. They need to get a jump on it as all governments move slowly. I think they last thing they want is the legislation passing after the birth.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #954  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:54 PM
dbarn67's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: BROOKLYN, United States
Posts: 3,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZaJa View Post
Being African American I can def say I would not want to live in the 1700s lol !
Count me with that same view.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #955  
Old 01-08-2013, 02:56 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
^^^^
After the birth won't be that big a deal....as long as it is before the birth of a second child if it is a girl first and a boy second but even then no biggie. Its not as if an infant and a toddler would have a real idea that their lives are planned out for them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #956  
Old 01-08-2013, 03:16 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by GracieGiraffe View Post
I agree. They need to get a jump on it as all governments move slowly. I think they last thing they want is the legislation passing after the birth.
Actually I think that would be the best thing, wait until Catherine gives birth and then change the succesion laws. If it's a boy then no one has to bother for another 60 years, if it's a girl then pass the law. Simple. Countries in the commonwealth have bigger issues to deal with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Excalibur View Post
I don't think that is the intention here. My take on the "rush" article is that it will be rushed through the British parliament in the two-weeks timeframe. If I understand correctly, the other parliaments cannot even consider the legislation unless/until it is passed by the British parliament. So this is the "jump-start" to get things moving.
They can consider legislation prior to something being passed in the UK courts. However in December it had been agreed that the UK would draft legislation first, but would not introduce it to the government until all 14 realms had agreed to the terms of the new legislation (roman catholic bit, limit line of succesion that asks for marriage permission etc). Also, even after they receieved agreement, the UK government would not go ahead until the other realms had their domestics situations in place for the change.

For instance in Australia, for new legislation to be created they have to amend the constitution and that requires a referendum. In mid decemeber some disagreement arose about how the country, and the separate states should go about this. Nothing has been resolved and a bill (on what i'm not sure) is supposed to arrive in parliament in 2013.

Canada is also a whole different ball game, all the provinces and the federal government must agree to the changes.

New Zealand is fine and dandy apparently, just needs to implement a few changes which will occur in 2013.

As for the UK, to "rush" this act through, they need parliamentary time and as of the start of December when the bill was drafted, there hasn't been any time allocated.

Everyone needs to agree at the same time, the legislation needs to be brought to law at the same time so that any baby boy or girl will have the correct succession rights in all 14 realms. We can't have a situation where a girl in first in line in one country, but her younger brother is first in line in another can we?
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #957  
Old 01-08-2013, 03:55 PM
Excalibur's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Jacksonville, Florida, United States
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Everyone needs to agree at the same time, the legislation needs to be brought to law at the same time so that any baby boy or girl will have the correct succession rights in all 14 realms. We can't have a situation where a girl in first in line in one country, but her younger brother is first in line in another can we?
I was aware that both Canada and Australia presented unique circumstances in the approval process, but I had not realized that the intent was for all of the realms to approve at the same time. Thank you for straightening me out.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #958  
Old 01-08-2013, 04:37 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,679
There is still debate in Australia as to whether or not a referendum is needed or whether it can be done by legislation - as happened with the Australia Act which severed all other ties with Britain other than the Queen.

Of course if it comes to a referendum (which I don't think it will) the referendum won't be on this issue at all but on becoming a republic.

The bigger question is whether the states have to also pass the legislation separately and independently of the Federal government and that isn't a given. With a Federal election year ahead the last thing the states and federal governments need is a stoush over states' rights that could end up in the High Court.

In Australia it could be very very simple or very complicated as each of the states have individual constutions that pre-date the federal constitution and it could be that some states have to have state referenda and others don't as well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #959  
Old 01-08-2013, 05:55 PM
GracieGiraffe's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Giraffe Land, United States
Posts: 1,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
There is still debate in Australia as to whether or not a referendum is needed or whether it can be done by legislation - as happened with the Australia Act which severed all other ties with Britain other than the Queen.

Of course if it comes to a referendum (which I don't think it will) the referendum won't be on this issue at all but on becoming a republic.

The bigger question is whether the states have to also pass the legislation separately and independently of the Federal government and that isn't a given. With a Federal election year ahead the last thing the states and federal governments need is a stoush over states' rights that could end up in the High Court.

In Australia it could be very very simple or very complicated as each of the states have individual constutions that pre-date the federal constitution and it could be that some states have to have state referenda and others don't as well.
It's not so much the succession order which most don't really care about, it's the question of setting a precedent for the feds trumping the states - we would have the same problem here in the United States. Interesting...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #960  
Old 01-08-2013, 06:16 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,178
Nick Clegg dismisses Prince Charles' fears on royal laws - Telegraph
Quote:
The Deputy Prime Minister told MPs that ministers’ plans to change the succession rules will not jeopardise the independence of the Church of England.
Ministers are changing succession laws to ensure that a first-born daughter of the Duke of Cambridge will be Queen, even if she has younger brother. A legal bar on heirs to the throne marrying Roman Catholics will also be removed.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Succession Issues ladybelline Imperial Family of Japan 921 11-03-2014 02:22 AM
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 926 04-15-2014 11:41 PM
Rules of Succession CrownPrinceLorenzo Royalty Past, Present, and Future 95 10-25-2012 01:55 PM




Popular Tags
belgium brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince daniel prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen fabiola queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:53 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
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]