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
 
  #461  
Old 04-22-2008, 09:40 PM
Leslie2006's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIDOROFF View Post
It is so in many ways:

1) Power is the art of men. When women try to rule, it is usually a disaster.
2) The Y-DNA is inherited only through the male line.
3) In normal circumstances, a family name is inherited in the male line.
4) Male primogeniture is the law in most monarchies.
Catherine II was a great ruler, as was Empress Elizabeth. Both expanded the Russian Empire, and Elizabeth I of England did the same for her country---she fought off invaders and remained committed to helping her people til the end of her life....and her reign lasted 45 years, to her death. Also, I think QEII has done a pretty good job of ruling for over the last 50 years on her own. And England needs a change. They're one of the few European monarchies with the male primogeniture still in place for this generation of royals.

Other current Queen Regants:
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
Queen Margarethe II of Denmark

They've done a pretty good job so far as well.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #462  
Old 04-22-2008, 09:57 PM
LadyCat's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: WM, United States
Posts: 371
Whew! Mandy closed this thread just in time to send my response to Neanderthal man to TRF cyber heaven! I might have ended up banned myself!

I'm sorry but male preference primogeniture has no place in the 21st century. I'm sure it originated sometime in the Middle Ages when women were still considered chattels but in today's world, women can be just as effective as men.

Cat
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #463  
Old 04-22-2008, 10:51 PM
Principessa Cano's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 85
I agree. There is no logical reason to deny the right to female heirs. Take CP Victoria. Is she any less her father's child than her brother because she is female? No. Will her children be any less her father's grandchildren? No. Her blood is as much Bernadotte as her brother's and the idea that the house name should have to change because she has XX and he has XY is ridiculous and antiquated.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #464  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:57 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: singapore, Singapore
Posts: 311
Question, if this change takes place it would only apply to William's generation or would it apply to Prince Charles as well? I mean would it be a retroactive change and Anne would replace Andrew in the line of succession etc?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #465  
Old 04-23-2008, 01:40 AM
Principessa Cano's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 85
I think that it would not change the current line but only effect those still to be born. For example, if William had a girl and then a boy, the girl would be the heir. However, Anne would not move ahead of Edward or Andrew nor would Louise move ahead of her little brother.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #466  
Old 04-23-2008, 02:13 AM
Shikha Pal's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hyderabad, India
Posts: 728
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingCharles View Post
I have been reading the newspapers recently and there has been some debate on a certain matter of royal succession. Apparently the Act of Settlement is to be amended to acquire to a more modern society.
so does that mean that now Princess Anne and Lady Louise are 4 and 11 in Line to the British Throne?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #467  
Old 04-23-2008, 02:36 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
No, they probably won't make it retroactive. Since Princess Anne and Lady Louise are so far down the line of succession, there's no need to make the law apply to them. It'll probably be worded so that the first generation it'd apply to would be William's children.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #468  
Old 04-23-2008, 10:13 AM
PrinceOfCanada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
Quote:
the idea that the house name should have to change because she has XX and he has XY is ridiculous and antiquated
It's actually even sillier than that, for two reasons:

1) Mitochondrial DNA is only replicated in the female line, so the whole thing about the Y chromosome is moot.

2) It's actually impossible (prior to modern DNA & paternity testing) to determine whether any given child is actually the child of their father. Conversely, one always knows who the mother is. This is the basis of historically matriarchal societies. Look at Judaism, for example; if one's father is a goy but one's mother is Jewish, the child is Jewish under Talmudic law. But not the other way around.

So for both of those reasons, female-preference primogeniture would actually be the preferable solution.

Quote:
Question, if this change takes place it would only apply to William's generation or would it apply to Prince Charles as well? I mean would it be a retroactive change and Anne would replace Andrew in the line of succession etc?
Categorically not. Laws of that sort aren't ever made retroactive--how far back would you go? The previous version of this bill said something to the effect of 'this will not affect current line of succession, and will only affect children born after the bill enters into law'. Or something like that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #469  
Old 04-23-2008, 11:12 AM
Princess B's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NA, Spain
Posts: 177
sounds like a more modern idea....

dunno how it works

i think the ammendment where the eldest child of the sovereign irrespective of gender succeeds to the throne wont be implemented...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #470  
Old 04-23-2008, 11:33 AM
PrincessofEurope's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,823
im not in favour of changing the aspect of the Act of Settlement that would royals in the line of succession to marrry a Catholic and not give up their right to the throne - it may not be very 21st century of inclusive but the UK is a Protestant nation and if say William married a Catholic then that afffects and heirs
__________________
This is the stuff of fairytales

Reply With Quote
  #471  
Old 04-23-2008, 11:37 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,242
Most of the UK isn't Protestant, though. Two-thirds of people don't claim a religion or attend any religious services. Even in another survey in which 53% of Britons identify as Christian, enough of them were Catholic to bump the protestant number down below 50%.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #472  
Old 04-23-2008, 11:53 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
As long as England has an established chuch, it's probably going to be necessary for the monarch to be in communion with that church. They could require that the spouse also be a member of the church, which would be fair enough. However, to say that the spouse can be a member of any other church or any other religion, but not Roman Catholic, is simply discrimination.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #473  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:02 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
I think that we're at a stage now where we really can't justify such blatant discrimination in such a public institution. The ban against Roman Catholics worked at the time it was passed but now it's archaic and unfair. It doesn't mean that suddenly the Pope will be moving to Buckingham Palace but it does mean that the UK is moving with the times, making old-fashioned institutions a little more modern. What will be interesting is how the new rights for female Royals will work. For example, does it mean that it affects the peerage too giving women the right to inherit a title from a parent though she isn't male? And will we see representatives of other faiths alongside the Bishops forming the Lords Spiritual in the House of Lords? Are we going to see the Lords go entirely? Will those cut out of the line of succession for marrying Catholics get their position back? Will Michael and Marie-Christine be welcomed into the fold and start performing Royal duties? It's a bit of a can of worms but I'm glad it's being opened.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #474  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:19 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: -, Ireland
Posts: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
may I say that the Republic of Ireland has been ruled for over 25 years by a woman and it's been a total success. Same thing for Switzerland.
We have never had a female Taoiseach in Ireland
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #475  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:25 PM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
We have never had a female Taoiseach in Ireland
Isn't Mary McAleese President of Ireland ? And wasn't Mary Robinson president too ?
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #476  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:33 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: -, Ireland
Posts: 629
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTruth View Post
Isn't Mary McAleese President of Ireland ? And wasn't Mary Robinson president too ?
Yes but it is the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) that does the ruling not the President.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #477  
Old 04-23-2008, 12:59 PM
TheTruth's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Between the first and second floor of the Eiffel Tower, France
Posts: 2,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amelia View Post
Yes but it is the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) that does the ruling not the President.
Yes, you're right. Sorry about that.

We have the same system in France. But the President still have some power anyway.
__________________

Please, help find a cure for ALS

Because it matters...
Reply With Quote
  #478  
Old 04-23-2008, 03:19 PM
PrinceOfCanada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
Quote:
For example, does it mean that it affects the peerage too giving women the right to inherit a title from a parent though she isn't male?
I think that would be wonderful... but imagine how enormous the scope of that law would be. It would have to affect all Letters Patent which created all hereditary peerages since the year dot. And despite such an act presumably not being retroactive, one wonders the can of worms that would open with extinct titles.

Quote:
And will we see representatives of other faiths alongside the Bishops forming the Lords Spiritual in the House of Lords?
That would be wonderful. The only difficulty would be in how they would set the criteria for inclusion. Bishops from CoE make sense for obvious reasons, but the only other religion with that sort of centralized power structure is the Catholic church. How would you include Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists?

Quote:
Are we going to see the Lords go entirely?
I hope not. I think the reform in 1999 was a terrible idea. Or, more accurately, it was the wrong sort of reform. Just as the Sovereign provides apolitical continuity in government, I think something like Lords should provide a neutral and continuous oversight of the politicized Commons. I'm not sure how such a reform would or should work...I'll need to noodle on that for a bit. I guess the bottom line for me is: the Lords are now elected, but they can't really do much beyond scrutinize. They can introduce legislation, but it must be passed by the Commons. A middle ground needs to be found.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #479  
Old 04-23-2008, 03:24 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Well, I suppose you'd get an Imam, a Buddhist spokesperson and a Rabbi. (Sounds like the start of a joke but you know what I mean). I think if they're going to end religious discrimination in the monarchy then they probably should in the Lords.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #480  
Old 04-23-2008, 07:36 PM
PrinceOfCanada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
Quote:
Well, I suppose you'd get an Imam, a Buddhist spokesperson and a Rabbi.
Yes.. but which Imam, which Lama, which Rabbi? Most religions other than some sects of Christianity have incredibly decentralized power structures.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
act of settlement, catholicism, line of succession, succession


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





Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympics ottoman poland pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 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]