OT: Happy Canada Day
jsessoms002 at nc.rr.com
Sun Jul 4 23:34:52 EDT 2010
From: paul stenquist
> 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!
If it were up to me, I wouldn't care one way or another. But what I
think doesn't matter to the British Parliament who get to make the decision.
OTOH, from what I read, under the succession law it wouldn't matter if
she were black, as long as she wasn't Roman Catholic or a divorcee.
I think it has something to do with England having a STATE religion.
More information about the PDML