! This post hasn't been updated in over a year. A lot can change in a year including my opinion and the amount of naughty words I use. There's a good chance that there's something in what's written below that someone will find objectionable. That's fine, if I tried to please everybody all of the time then I'd be a Lib Dem (remember them?) and I'm certainly not one of those. The point is, I'm not the kind of person to try and alter history in case I said something in the past that someone can use against me in the future but just remember that the person I was then isn't the person I am now nor the person I'll be in a year's time.

Lib Dem MP, Evan Harris, has introduced a private members bill to alter the succession to the Crown and to lift the ban on heirs to the throne marrying catholics.

Aside from the fact that there are far more important things to worry about, is it really a constructive use of very expensive parliamentary time to debate a law that won’t realistically prevent discrimination against any living person?

The first female heir to the throne who has been bumped down the list who would make any significant gain is Princess Anne at number 10, behind Prince Charles, Prince William, Prince Harry, Prince Andrew, Princess Beatrice, Princess Euginie, Prince Edward, Prince James and Princess Louise.  If the laws of succession were changed and she was bumped up the list, she would end up in 4th.  The chances of Princess Anne, who is already 59 years old, becoming Queen is pretty slim.  Princess Beatrice and Princess Euginie would drop down a place and Princess Louise would stay in 9th.

So, there’s little point changing the laws of succession for females when nobody will benefit.  But what of the other “discrimination” – that of banning Catholics or spouses of Catholics from the throne?

Well, the ban on catholics sitting on the throne is there for a very good reason.  The monarch owes their alliegence only to their country and their subjects, not to the Pope.  The monarch is also Supreme Governor of the Church of England and Defender of the Faith.  How can a catholic become king or queen and take the oath to defend the established church if they belong to a different church?

A BBC poll apparently showed that 89% of people thought women should have equal rights of succession but how many of those people realised that it wouldn’t make any difference to anyone currently alive and that it would have the net effect of pushing two women further back down the line?  The poll also apparently showed that 81% of people thought that the ban on marrying catholics should be lifted but how many of them realised that it would mean the king or queen would no longer be head of the Anglican Church?
We are in the midst of a recession, we are worst placed of any developed nation to ride out the storm, unemployment has reached 2 million and banks and big businesses are collapsing left right and centre.  How can any MP think that such a pointless and futile exercise is important?

Technorati Technorati Tags: , ,


  1. axel (1214 comments) says:

    Its like Fox Hunting, it affects no one but everyone has an opinion, it is a good distractor from the shit that going on.

    Also, it is a private members bill, it is of little or no consequence, they get dumped all the time, just this one has been given a bit of publicity, to get people talking about it.

    of the 81%, how many are actual Aglicans or even C of E Anglicans?

  2. axel (1214 comments) says:

    Defender of the Faith is a Catholic title, it was given to Henry 8 by Leo 10

  3. Crushed (3 comments) says:

    As things stand though, you could have a Hundi monarch, but not a Catholic one.

    Personally, I don’t think we should have an established church anyway, but I do think its wrong that we still have legislation which still reminds Catholics that we aren’t really equal citizens of this country.

  4. axel (1214 comments) says:

    I wonder if was a good Porno?

    Something like ‘Pretty girls who are not dog ball breaking politicians, take their clothes off, wander about the house in the nip and dont whine (unless you want them too, of course(;))’

  5. axel (1214 comments) says:

    the above is in reference to what the Home Secretary’s hubby was watching while him charming missus was away at work, late on a saturday night

  6. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    Axel, clicky.

  7. Henry North London (1 comments) says:

    Its been killed anyway full debate from H o P

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.