Danish Referendum on Succession Laws; June 2009

[Bones]

Originally Posted by Jacknch

I do hope that the people of Denmark who voted in the referendum have considered and discussed the subject as much as we all did here! There's nothing worse than people voting for something without looking at all the reasons for and against it before making a final decision!

Sage advice for any election on any issue. Things would be a whole lot better on every sort of issue if people would seriously think things over and discuss them before voting. It might also make for less animosity and more understanding of the opposite position even if agreement is not possible.

[Lilla]

Originally Posted by Jacknch

I do hope that the people of Denmark who voted in the referendum have considered and discussed the subject as much as we all did here! There's nothing worse than people voting for something without looking at all the reasons for and against it before making a final decision!

Whatever the end result will be, the main thing for me is the continued future of the Danish monarchy - as secure as ever and with many future generations to reign.

I agree Jacknch. I think it is of great importance to have a discussion about the role of monarchy today. Without such a discussion it is impossible for the monarchy to develope in accordance with a modern world and the royals will be stuck in the past - not because they want to - but because it wouldt not be legitimate for them to modernize their roles and they will have no knowledge about what the people actually are expecting of them when preforming their role in a modern sociaty. A discussion will legitimate change and show the direction.

IMO such a discussion will save the monarchy while no discussion ultimatly will be the end of monarchy. I think it has been very healthy that the refferendum has started this debate. I do think as well that the small minority of republican Danes who is now using this debate to promote their viewpoint is in for a surprise when they find out, that the Danes voting NO or Blank, all had their individual reasons for doing so which did not necessarily have anything to do with wanting the end of the monarchy.

[Jacknch]

Thanks Bones and Lilla for responding to my comments! The other thing I just thought of regarding the importance of discussion and debate on issues such as monarchy is that people easily forget the importance of why these institutions exist and they can easily become irrelevant in people's minds.

[Lilla]

Originally Posted by Jacknch

Thanks Bones and Lilla for responding to my comments! The other thing I just thought of regarding the importance of discussion and debate on issues such as monarchy is that people easily forget the importance of why these institutions exist and they can easily become irrelevant in people's minds.

Yes, you are so right. It is importand for us to recall through debate why thing are the way they are and that there is a reason for this

[Kotroman]

According to historian Steffen Heiberg, the Queen is opposed to the change. See Dronningen imod ændring af tronfølgeloven - Danmark Once the monarch's word loses every authority (that is, the right to oppose to something which concerns her family's tradition), the monarchy becomes ridiculous. Why would anyone want a doll who cannot decide about her own family as head of state?

Heiberg also says:

* If you change the monarchy and make it look like the rest of the society, it will lose its special status.

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Kotroman

* If you change the monarchy and make it look like the rest of the society, it will lose its special status.

Indeed. But i don't see how giving Denmark equal primogenture makes royals the same as us??

[Al_bina]

I dare to assume that the primogeniture will be the last thing the governments has changed in order to be in tune with the spirit of times. What other changes can possibly be introduced? ... selecting the best among a king's/queen's children to ascend the throne ?

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

I dare to assume that the primogeniture will be the last thing the governments has changed in order to be in tune with the spirit of times. What other changes can possibly be introduced? ... selecting the best among a king's/queen's children to ascend the throne ?

Now that would be a tiny bit to far. But i don't think it is the last thing the government has done?

[Lilla]

Originally Posted by Kotroman

According to historian Steffen Heiberg, the Queen is opposed to the change. See Dronningen imod ændring af tronfølgeloven - Danmark Once the monarch's word loses every authority (that is, the right to oppose to something which concerns her family's tradition), the monarchy becomes ridiculous. Why would anyone want a doll who cannot decide about her own family as head of state?

Heiberg also says:

* If you change the monarchy and make it look like the rest of the society, it will lose its special status.

I am alwayes on guard when someone claims to be capable of telling what is going on inside the head of somebody else - just like Steffen Heiberg is being quoted to do in this article in regard to QMII. Especially in this case as the Queen has been challenged by one journalist after another to tell what she thought about the issue resulting only in a polite refusal on her behalf to utter a word.

I guess this was the best Berlingske Tidende could do in order to get an answer - using the telepathic abilities of Steffen Heiberg

[marmi]

And a snipet from Hello: Danes vote for girls to have equal footing in royal succession |Latest celebrity news hellomagazine.com

[Kotroman]

Originally Posted by Lilla

I am alwayes on guard when someone claims to be capable of telling what is going on inside the head of somebody else - just like Steffen Heiberg is being quoted to do in this article in regard to QMII. Especially in this case as the Queen has been challenged by one journalist after another to tell what she thought about the issue resulting only in a polite refusal on her behalf to utter a word.

I guess this was the best Berlingske Tidende could do in order to get an answer - using the telepathic abilities of Steffen Heiberg

Nobody has used "telepathic abilities" to claim otherwise

It seems that Mr Heiberg's "telepathic abilities" are respected widely, as he is one of the acknowledged Danish historians.

[UserDane]

Sorry, but in the time leading up to this election I have heard critical voices against the know-all attitude by mr. Heiberg. A historian, yes, well-respected, probably - knows it all - hardly
It was on the radio one day I heard someone comment very dryly that mr. Heiberg is rather fond of telling us what the queen thinks on various issues.

[Maura724]

I don't think there's necessarily any reason we should believe him, but on the other hand I don't think we have any reason to be certain that the Queen does approve of the referendum. I think it's possible she's quite pleased with the result, but I also think it's just as possible that she isn't - some people in Denmark were, of course, against the change, and I don't think it would be absolutely unbelievable for her to be one of them, especially considering that I've read (it was referenced somewhere on this website, but I can't remember where) that her father begged for the law not to be changed back in 1953 so that his daughter would be spared the burden of the throne.

[Bones]

It may not be possible for outsiders to know what the Queen's position is on equal premoginature but it would seem reasonable enough to me for her to be opposed to it, her status as a Queen not withstanding. She is from a generation that held faster to handed-down traditions and just because it is a "woman's issue" does not mean all women will agree. If I remember right Queen Victoria of Britain was against women's suffrage and supposedly the last words of the formidable Empress-Dowager Cixi of China were a warning to never again let a woman dominate the government.

[Lilla]

Originally Posted by Maura724

I don't think there's necessarily any reason we should believe him, but on the other hand I don't think we have any reason to be certain that the Queen does approve of the referendum. I think it's possible she's quite pleased with the result, but I also think it's just as possible that she isn't

You are so right Maura724. Fact is nobody knows but the Queen herselfe

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by marmi

And a snipet from Hello: Danes vote for girls to have equal footing in royal succession |Latest celebrity news hellomagazine.com

Does this mean that CP Mary gives birth to a son next he will be placed 4th in line after Princess Isabella or does he get placed 3rd?

Because Norway changed their laws in 1990 but it didn't apply to Martha-Louise who is older than Haakon. Is this the case for Isabella?

[JessRulz]

It would depend on when the new act is brought in, and if Mary has another boy before then. Then it would also depend on if it was retroactive (like in Sweden) or not (like in Norway).

[maria-olivia]

But for the surname , a Christian follows always a Frederik and vice/versa.
Centuries later a Margarete II succeeded Margarete I.
Why is their a problem to give a surname to Joachim's 3e boy ??

[Lumutqueen]

Originally Posted by JessRulz

It would depend on when the new act is brought in, and if Mary has another boy before then. Then it would also depend on if it was retroactive (like in Sweden) or not (like in Norway).

Thank you for that information JessRulz. I really hope it does include Isabella it would be unfair for her to loose her place because of the rule being brought in at an inconvenient time.

[Jacknch]

Just out of interest, could someone let us know what the actual wording/question was on the ballot paper people were given to cast their vote with regard to the referendum? I think the question would have had to have been very carefully worded.

I imagine that QMII would have had very definate personal views on the referendum, along with views discussed with the givernment, but exactly what those veiws might be may never truly be known (unless she states them). I would hope that the government would have taken on board what she had to say about it because after all it is her family's future being decided upon from a personal point of view.

On the other hand, her views may well have had to be balanced with the fact that she is a monarch, not just a mother and grandparent and her official views ought to have been guided by the will of the people.

Having said that, until someone said "there's a problem with the monarchy because of equal rights so we need a referendum on it" was the whole issue really that important for the people of Denmark? Like many issues, most people are probably quite happy with the staus quo until some bright spark decides to bring up a subject no one ever thought of before and before you know it there's a referendum on it (or not in some cases!). I've said it before: the strength of the monarchy is found in its consistency, traditions and the fact that it remains the same (most of the time), which is important in an ever changing and supposedly progressive world. Phew! I'll jump off my soap-box and have a cuppa now!