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
 
  #481  
Old 04-24-2008, 02:01 AM
Lakshmi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: *, United States
Posts: 1,226
I am confused: is succession law changed in UK already or it's just a project? I went though entire thread and I still not sure...
__________________

__________________
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right - for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't.''
Eleanor Roosevelt

"The course of true love never did run smooth " William Shakespeare, 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'

http://www.aishwarya-rai.com/
Reply With Quote
  #482  
Old 04-24-2008, 03:02 AM
tinkerbell1948's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Country SA, Australia
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingCharles View Post
Be aware however, that this enactment may not happen for months, even years - only because even if Westminster passes this law, all the other governments in which Her Majesty is sovereign will have to debate this law also and decide whether or not they also agree. I think every country can have their own independent views on the situation but if one country dis-agrees with any of the proposals then it's back to the drawing board as the Act of Settlement is a law in all the countries the Queen is Head of State. Therefore, all countries must agree on the change.

What are your thoughts?
I doubt very much whether our Australian Constitution requires Australia to vote on any of these matters ...........it would go to a referendum in that case to change the Constitution. Must go googling to find out though LOL

We have already had a failed referendum on a Republic. It wasn't the Republic that was rejected per se but it's model..............that the Australian people would not elect the President but that the President would be chosen from within "the ranks" after an election

I do see Australia evetually becoming a Republic I just hope not in my lifetime
__________________

__________________
Tink
Reply With Quote
  #483  
Old 04-24-2008, 09:58 AM
PrinceOfCanada's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinkerbell1948 View Post
I doubt very much whether our Australian Constitution requires Australia to vote on any of these matters
It may not require a constitutional amendment, but per the Statute of Westminster 1931, to which Australia is subject, it would require Australian agreement.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #484  
Old 04-24-2008, 10:02 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrinceOfCanada View Post
It may not require a constitutional amendment, but per the Statute of Westminster 1931, to which Australia is subject, it would require Australian agreement.
Yes, I think I have read or heard this before that all the governments of the Commonwealth Realms have to be cosnsulted and come to an agreement etc. For no terribly serious crisis has happened since the abdication of Edward VIII, this sort of terribly out-dated sort of law is long forgotten by many.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #485  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:30 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lakshmi View Post
I am confused: is succession law changed in UK already or it's just a project? I went though entire thread and I still not sure...
It was just some loose talk by one of the Ministers, the government later announced that they had no plans to change the laws of succession or the Royal Marriage Act ban on marriages to Roman Catholics.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #486  
Old 04-25-2008, 01:38 AM
Lakshmi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: *, United States
Posts: 1,226
Thank you for clarifying. I don't think succession law should be changed, monarchy is about tradition not equality anyway. I think not everything should be modernized in monarchy, maybe I'm too sentimental...Of course there were a lot of great queens (Elizabeth I, one of my favorites)...
But they should change law prohibiting marrying Catholics. A few hundred years ago it was political issue, but now I don't think so.
__________________
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right - for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't.''
Eleanor Roosevelt

"The course of true love never did run smooth " William Shakespeare, 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'

http://www.aishwarya-rai.com/
Reply With Quote
  #487  
Old 04-25-2008, 02:04 AM
tinkerbell1948's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Country SA, Australia
Posts: 149
I remember when Princess Caroline of Monaco was touted as being a possible bride for Prince Charles but of course the thought couldn't even be entertained because she is Catholic
__________________
Tink
Reply With Quote
  #488  
Old 04-25-2008, 09:42 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,377
There's not a single link in this thread to a news source showing that the Government is discussing changes to the Act of Settlement.
If there is nothing new, this thread may as well be merged into the existing Act of Settlement thread so we don't have needless duplication.

Warren
British Forums moderator

+ + + + + + + + + + + + +

ETA.. threads merged 28 April.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #489  
Old 04-25-2008, 10:14 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinkerbell1948 View Post
I remember when Princess Caroline of Monaco was touted as being a possible bride for Prince Charles but of course the thought couldn't even be entertained because she is Catholic
It didn't help that when this speculation was being floated by the London tabloids the two had never met!
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #490  
Old 08-09-2008, 09:04 AM
magnik's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,681
About Briish succsession and links:
The Order of Succession to the British Throne
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #491  
Old 08-09-2008, 06:32 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: France, France
Posts: 22
Monarchy should not rule love!!!!!

Well dear lady, the principle is still the same. Whether it is a catholic or another religion, monarchy rules state that the royal member of the family cannot marry a non anglican. Everyone can interprete rules as it seems to his or her eyes. The magna carta law has always been in existence since monarchy exists. Regarding Kate, I have no idea whether she could be anglican or catholic and my article is related in case she might not be anglican, religion should not be a barrier to love as men and women are free to love and make a family. No monarchy law should in the name of human rights forbids the private freedom of anyone wishing to make his or her life with whom he or she loves, let alone does he or she belong in the royalty.

Regarding Camilla's relationship with william, things have not been so bright as they seems to be as she has been against her choice and this is not surprising. She remains a step mother that has hated Diana and broke her marriage. She has been awful too with Harry when he was running on tough times. She is only good at eating icecream and becoming bulky.All these informations have been on international press. Please do some reading this might help you whilst discussing any topic.
Nazma FOURRE
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #492  
Old 08-09-2008, 06:34 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,151
A member of the Royal Family can marry anyone except a Roman Catholic and remain in the line of succession. He/she doesn't have to marry an Anglican/Member of the Church of England.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazma FOURRE View Post
Well dear lady, the principle is still the same. Whether it is a catholic or another religion, monarchy rules state that the royal member of the family cannot marry a non anglican. Everyone can interprete rules as it seems to his or her eyes. The magna carta law has always been in existence since monarchy exists. Regarding Kate, I have no idea whether she could be anglican or catholic and my article is related in case she might not be anglican, religion should not be a barrier to love as men and women are free to love and make a family. No monarchy law should in the name of human rights forbids the private freedom of anyone wishing to make his or her life with whom he or she loves, let alone does he or she belong in the royalty.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #493  
Old 08-09-2008, 06:51 PM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazma FOURRE View Post
Well dear lady, the principle is still the same. Whether it is a catholic or another religion, monarchy rules state that the royal member of the family cannot marry a non anglican. Everyone can interprete rules as it seems to his or her eyes. The magna carta law has always been in existence since monarchy exists. Regarding Kate, I have no idea whether she could be anglican or catholic and my article is related in case she might not be anglican, religion should not be a barrier to love as men and women are free to love and make a family. No monarchy law should in the name of human rights forbids the private freedom of anyone wishing to make his or her life with whom he or she loves, let alone does he or she belong in the royalty.
Nazma, you're off base here -- I've already made this point specifically in response to one of your posts in this thread, but I'll do it again, since I guess you missed that reply. As Mermaid said above, British monarchs can marry someone of any religion -- except Catholics. It's from the Act of Settlement 1701. Here's the actual text:

Quote:
That all and every person and persons, who shall or may take or inherit the said Crown, by virtue of the limitation of this present act, and is, are or shall be reconciled to, or shall hold communion with, the See or Church of Rome, or shall profess the popish religion, or shall marry a papist, shall be subject to such incapacities.
The popish religion is Catholicism; papists are Catholics. I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that all non-Anglicans and those who marry them are barred from the line of succession, but that's not true. It's only Catholics.
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
Reply With Quote
  #494  
Old 08-09-2008, 06:55 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I'm still waiting with bated breath to find out what the Magna Carta has to do with the religion of the girl that William marries!

If it does, its not the Magna Carta that I learned in school.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #495  
Old 08-09-2008, 09:27 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: France, France
Posts: 22
Sorry: act of settlement not the magnacarta law

The act of settlement and not the magna carta law is the law that prevents a member of the royal family to marry a non anglican.According to the act of settlement of 1701 which includes many important constitutional provisions especially the succession of the throne. For exemple: it made illegal the succession of illegitimate adopted or catholic persons. The monarch has to remain protestant.

So here the debate is still the same save an error has been made regarding the nomination of magnacarta law instead of act of settlement(I appologize). So monarchy rules as the act of settlement cannot rule and fence human rights.

On the other hand the magna carta law describes the rights and liberties of sovereigns, noblemen along with ordinary men and women.
So in the name of human rights, and love , the magna carta law which is a law of liberties meaning freedom should bypass the act of settlement . By this I mean there is no reason, why should Prince william not be free to marry Kate,let alone her religious values, should she be anglican or catholics?
Nazma FOURRE
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #496  
Old 08-09-2008, 10:00 PM
Ella Kay's Avatar
Courtier
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Anywhere, United States
Posts: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazma FOURRE View Post
On the other hand the magna carta law describes the rights and liberties of sovereigns, noblemen along with ordinary men and women. So in the name of human rights, and love , the magna carta law which is a law of liberties meaning freedom should bypass the act of settlement . By this I mean there is no reason, why should Prince william not be free to marry Kate,let alone her religious values, should she be anglican or catholics?
He is free to marry Kate. She is not Catholic. As long as his grandmother approves of the marriage (because the monarch has the ultimate say on consent to marriages of those in the line of succession), they can get married. He can (theoretically) marry any woman, so long as she is not a Catholic. She could be Jewish, Muslim, purple, or from another planet, just as long as she isn't Catholic. The monarch has to be a Protestant, you're right, but his spouse doesn't have to be -- she just has to be non-Catholic.

I think you're misunderstanding to some extent what the Magna Carta is. I won't claim to be a scholar of British constitutional law, but I do know that the Magna Carta never guaranteed freedom and liberty to everyone in Britain, even way back in 1215. It was a first step in establishing documents that would later guarantee things like human rights, but it's most significant for imposing restrictions on the power of the king at the time. And, as wbenson helpfully noted upthread, not all of the document is even in force anymore.

The British Constitution is a collection of laws and acts from various points in British history, and to my knowledge, no document outweighs any other in that collection. So the Magna Carta can't overrule the Act of Settlement 1701 -- and, to my knowledge, there isn't a part of any of the versions of the Magna Carta that would cancel out the ban on Catholic monarchs anyway (especially because the king who signed it was, well, Catholic.)
__________________

"I have to be seen to be believed."
HM The Queen
Reply With Quote
  #497  
Old 08-09-2008, 10:26 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,033
I think the resolution of the "Catholic question" with regards to the Royals is long overdue. I am a British Catholic and although I enjoy the frivolous side of Royal watching I have no loyalty to the Crown because my religion is the only one that is barred as far as members of the family retaining their right to the Throne is concerned. It makes me feel alien in this country to the extent that, for example, I would never allow my son to fight in the armed forces in the name of a Queen who is prejudiced against him and his family. I thought that such attitudes were dying out until Autumn Kelly renounced her Catholicism upon marrying Peter Phillips. It was a stark reminder that nothing has really changed at all.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #498  
Old 08-09-2008, 10:33 PM
Odette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 2,481
I can understand how you feel and appreciate your point of view.
The Duchess of Kent converted to Catholicism after her marriage and I do not believe her husband lost his rights, also her son married a Catholic but I do not know if he lost his rights.
When there were whispers of Marie Astrid of Luxenbourg and Prince Charles the one issue that would never be resolved was her religion. (Probably it was all speculation but still...........)She is very happy but I still believe she would have made a lovely wife for Prince Charles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #499  
Old 08-09-2008, 10:49 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odette View Post
I can understand how you feel and appreciate your point of view.
The Duchess of Kent converted to Catholicism after her marriage and I do not believe her husband lost his rights, also her son married a Catholic but I do not know if he lost his rights.
The Earl of St Andrews lost his position in the line of succession on his marriage to a Catholic; his younger brother Lord Nicholas lost his position when he converted to Catholicism.

I totally agree that this piece of religious discrimination is well past its sell-by date. I'd love to see it reversed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #500  
Old 08-09-2008, 10:56 PM
Odette's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tampa, United States
Posts: 2,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
The Earl of St Andrews lost his position in the line of succession on his marriage to a Catholic; his younger brother Lord Nicholas lost his position when he converted to Catholicism.

I totally agree that this piece of religious discrimination is well past its sell-by date. I'd love to see it reversed.
Thank you Elspeth. Besides the Duke of Kent's sons and Prince Michael are there any other close to the Queen who lost their rights to succesion because of marriages to Catholics?
__________________

__________________
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
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor 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 olympic games ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:41 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]