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
 
  #141  
Old 01-19-2011, 06:01 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,837
Would not the Princess Royal follow Charles in that instance, thus moving everyone in line down?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 01-19-2011, 06:05 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta View Post
Would not the Princess Royal follow Charles in that instance, thus moving everyone in line down?
I believe the intention is that the new law would be effective for William's children.
__________________

__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 01-19-2011, 06:13 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I believe the intention is that the new law would be effective for William's children.
I think that's the way it would work too. As in "Everyone stay right where you are now. The law effects anyone born on or after this date." That would most likely mean starting with William and Kate's children and or Harry's children (should he have them first) or any title to be passed on to children born on or after the day the law was enacted.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 01-19-2011, 06:19 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,887
Now my question is.. and sorry if this has been asked before.

Would the Law of Equal Primogeniture pertain only to the line of succession to the Crown? I can imagine it would cause great havoc among peers as up until now, titles were passed down only to the first born sons. Many titles I've heard are very restrictive such as the Prince of Wales title going only to the first born son of the reigning monarch.

Could be interesting though... a first born daughter inherits her father's duchy and becomes the Duch of xxx and her husband then the Dukette of xxx? Odd thought isn't it?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 01-19-2011, 08:19 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,491
I don't see why the eldest daughter of a peer can't inherit the title.

I also don't see why a man can raise the status of his wife but a woman can't raise the status of her husband - totally discriminatory. e.g. Charles, Andrew and Edward raised their wives to HRH but Anne's husbands were not similarly raised automatically (I know they were offered titles etc but my point is that it shouldn't have been necessary).

I would like to see the law saying either - the higher ranked partner in the marriage raises their partner to that rank or no one rises on marriage so William stay HRH Prince William but Kate simply becomes Mrs Mountbatten Windsor or to raise Kate to HRH Princess William then Beatrice's husband should be automatically a Prince on marriage. Forget the personalities involved for a minute and simply look at the discrimination against men happening here.

If inheritance is to be non-discriminatory (other than being the first born of a particular set of parents) then it should spread beyond just one title.

Please note - I think you have confused the Duke of Cornwall title with the Prince of Wales title - Cornwall is restricted to eldest living son and heir apparent while Prince of Wales can go to the heir apparent regardless of being the eldest living son e.g. George III was Prince of Wales but never Duke of Cornwall never having been the son of the monarch.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 01-19-2011, 08:21 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,491
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystiblue View Post
An interesting clip on Australian Television suggested the Constitution could be changed so that the first born of William and Kate - even if female - could become Queen. Here is the link.
Could Prince William's first-born daughter be first in line for the throne? | Ministry of Gossip | Los Angeles Times

This was always going to come up once William got engaged - just as it did when Diana was pregnant with William. The suggestion was made then to change the order of succession to allow the first born to inherit but when William was born it died a natural death to be raised again now.

It will come of course but I hope they get it right and cover all titles and not just the crown.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 01-19-2011, 08:44 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 3,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Please note - I think you have confused the Duke of Cornwall title with the Prince of Wales title - Cornwall is restricted to eldest living son and heir apparent while Prince of Wales can go to the heir apparent regardless of being the eldest living son e.g. George III was Prince of Wales but never Duke of Cornwall never having been the son of the monarch.
I was close though Thanks for explaining it more clearly to me. I most definitely agree with you on making all of it on equal basis. The days of the husband being "lord and master" and having the words "obey" in the marriage vows are very long gone and best remained buried. Most couples in this day and age are definitely equal partners in everything and to keep something so anachronistic in the British peerage system is to have something that is clearly stating to all that women still are regarded as "inferior" beings and not intelligent enough to inherit anything. Britain has has a female PM but yet females of the peerage cannot directly inherit. What's wrong with this picture?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 01-20-2011, 01:03 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,124
Laws on Royal succession favouring male heirs could be ripped up | Mail Online
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 01-20-2011, 01:31 PM
Esmerelda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,215
Prince William's daughter a queen? Yes, and I hope she marries a Catholic – Telegraph Blogs
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 01-20-2011, 03:01 PM
Lenora's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 2,056
How could she know that Kate will have a daughter?By now it's a speculation.We'll see later ,but it will be better to let William and Kate decide,or The Queen
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 01-20-2011, 04:45 PM
Esmerelda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,215
I don't think royals have any say in the succession. If they could choose which of their children succeeded them there wouldn't be a law for the firstborn son or firstborn child depending on country.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 01-20-2011, 05:13 PM
Maura724's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, United States
Posts: 772
That's a really, really interesting thought. Not that there's a chance of it happening anywhere, or that it would even be a good idea, but I think it's a fascinating thing to think about - what would it be like if royal families could choose amongst themselves who the successor should be?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 01-20-2011, 05:58 PM
Esmerelda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,215
Actually, I believe in ancient China the Emperor in some of the dynasties could choose among his sons. But if this happened today, people would probably ask why they don't widen the field of choice to the whole population. Additionally, it might generate a lot of sibling rivalry and tension in the Royal families themselves. So I guess it's best to have the heir designated by law.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 01-21-2011, 05:14 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,124
Why we should ALWAYS give the crown to a woman | Mail Online
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 01-21-2011, 02:16 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Louisville, United States
Posts: 64
Change law of succession?

My biggest fear is that William and Kate's first born will be a girl and that they will saddle her with "Diana" as her first name. With that in mind [and I wouldn't wish that on any child--way to overwhelming a legacy] should Parliament revise things so a first-born is heir regardless of gender? Personally I'm praying William and Harry's children are all boys or at least lots of boys first, then a girl. I know the Di-groupies would be gaga for a little "Queen Diana" but I think that would send the poor kid straight to therapy with the overwhelming shadow of granny ever to reign over her!!

Also, what about Catholics? Currently most of the Duke of Kent's family are now Catholic and for the first time in so long a royal Dukedom will become not only NON-Royal, but Catholic on the current Duke's death. Should that change? Should the Sovereign be, as Prince Charles has suggested, the Defender of FathS and not "the Faith?"
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 01-21-2011, 03:08 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 46
I don't know why but I would want them to have a girl, but if it's a boy it's okay too.
What happens if they are twins? Would the first one that comes out be heir or could they just pick which one they want?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 01-21-2011, 03:14 PM
Lenora's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 2,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by QEII View Post
I don't know why but I would want them to have a girl, but if it's a boy it's okay too.
What happens if they are twins? Would the first one that comes out be heir or could they just pick which one they want?
Yes,they have a good chance to have twins as Earl Spencer,Diana's brother has twin-daughters.If we look at the Spencer bloodline we could see more girls than boys,the Windsor bloodline is quite equal ,but who knows.
I think if they have twins of different gender,the heir will be boy.If the twins will be both girls,the first should be considered as heir,if they will change the law of equal primogeniture
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 01-21-2011, 03:26 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Coventry, United Kingdom
Posts: 34
Sovereignty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopewell View Post
Also, what about Catholics? Currently most of the Duke of Kent's family are now Catholic and for the first time in so long a royal Dukedom will become not only NON-Royal, but Catholic on the current Duke's death. Should that change? Should the Sovereign be, as Prince Charles has suggested, the Defender of FathS and not "the Faith?"
Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. The concept has been discussed, debated and questioned throughout history, from the time of the Romans through to the present day, although it has changed in its definition, concept, and application throughout, especially during the Age of Englightenment. The current notion of state sovereignty is often traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia (1648), which, in relation to states, codified the basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and supremacy of the state (rather than the Church).

I believe Charles is correct about faiths in view of state soveignty in relation to integrity (and also the law does supercede the Church).

There is protestant, presbetyrian, catholic, roman catholic, lutharian, orthodox and many other religions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 01-21-2011, 03:53 PM
nascarlucy's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Florida Area, United States
Posts: 1,340
Here something that would be rather interesting. If Kate was carrying twins and one was a boy the other a girl. Whoever was born first would be firstborn. Unless the law of succession changes, the male would still be the heir to the throne regardless of how they were born.

If the law changes, then the first baby who was taken out would be the heir to the throne. It would be interesting if there was a change in the law (whoever was born first) if the doctor would attempt to take the male out first if the birth was a C-section. As of yet, this issue has never arose in any royal household as the first born male would be heir to the throne regardless of birth order.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 01-21-2011, 05:46 PM
Esmerelda's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,215
I would surely hope that in the case of a c section the doctors would take out whichever baby it would be safest to do.
__________________

__________________
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
The Act of Settlement 1701 and the Line of Succession Elise,LadyofLancaster British Royals 926 04-15-2014 11:41 PM
Succession Issues ladybelline Imperial Family of Japan 918 11-02-2013 12:14 PM
Rules of Succession CrownPrinceLorenzo Royalty Past, Present, and Future 95 10-25-2012 01:55 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince felipe crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympics ottoman pom president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess astrid princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess letizia princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:45 PM.

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]