Do the English really want Prince Charles for their king? Dan
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 6:35 PM, paul stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Jul 4, 2010, at 5:30 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > >> It's a very real CURRENT issue. The heir-apparent Prince of Wales, Charles >> Windsor, appears to have run afoul of the Succession Act himself. >> >> He's divorced, he's married to a divorcee and she's a [former] Roman >> Catholic. (Three strikes.) >> >> Just being the first born son of the current monarch isn't enough to put him >> on the throne. Charles doesn't inherit unless he can convince Parliament to >> say he can inherit, which from this distance appears less and less likely. >> There's a very real chance the succession will skip over Charles to his >> eldest son because he will not get the consent of Parliament. >> >> You also might consider how the "last king" ended up on the throne, as he >> was not first in the line of succession when his father died. >> >> Hint: Wallace Simpson was also a divorcee and a Roman Catholic. >> > > If those factors are really relevant, it's all the more damning, isn't it? > What if she were black? Horrors! > Paul >> >> >> From: "Daniel J. Matyola" >>> "The Queen is the Queen by right of Parliament, _not_ right of birth." >>> Really? And you believe that? They just HAPPENED to pick the >>> daughter of the last King? What an extraordinary coincidence! >>> Dan >>> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Graydon <gray...@marost.ca> wrote: >>>> > On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 02:25:51PM -0400, Daniel J. Matyola scripsit: >>>>> >> If we say that the Queen is superior by reason of birth and has rights >>>>> >> that can't be taken away, >>>> > >>>> > No one says any such thing. >>>> > >>>> > The Queen is the Queen by right of Parliament, _not_ right of birth. >>>> > (This is, for instance, why there is such a thing as the Succession >>>> > Act, or why it's widely acknowledged -- since Parliament has done it, >>>> > twice and a half (Headless Chuck, James the Fled, and Edward the >>>> > Abbreviated) -- that the elected Parliament can replace the monarch, >>>> > or, for that matter, why Her Majesty has publicly stated that if she's >>>> > presented with an act converting the UK into a republic, she'll sign >>>> > it.) >>>> > >>>> > Supremacy of Parliament is a very real thing. >>>> > >>>> > Which is not to say I'm not -- being of a somewhat egalitarian bent -- >>>> > in favour of both a stronger monarchy and a selective one in Canada, >>>> > rather than one with the current hereditary succession, but the idea >>>> > that the English Monarchy came down on the side of Divine Right is >>>> > really laughable. >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
