Lakshmi
Serene Highness
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,238
- City
- Arizona
- Country
- United States
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...
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 may not require a constitutional amendment, but per the Statute of Westminster 1931, to which Australia is subject, it would require Australian agreement.
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 didn't help that when this speculation was being floated by the London tabloids the two had never met!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
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.
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.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]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.
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?
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.
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?
Two of the Earl of St Andrews's children have lost their rights to succession, but through conversion, not marriage. Baron Downpatrick and Lady Marina-Charlotte Windsor both converted and have lost their spots. Their sister, Lady Amelia Windsor, has remained a Protestant and so gets to stay.
What will be the number of this Prince Sven lets say or Princess Sarah of Denmark
However, you have to agree that a Catholic couldn't be head of the Church of England ...