- CRITTER TALK
- NEWS I FIND INTERESTING
“Sons and daughters of any future UK monarch will have equal right to the throne, after Commonwealth leaders agreed to change succession laws.
The leaders of the 16 Commonwealth countries where the Queen is head of state unanimously approved the changes at a summit in Perth, Australia.
It means a first-born daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge would take precedence over younger brothers.”
Whoopee! Wills & Kate — full speed ahead.
Finally, equal rights for ….er, first-born Windsor family members.
Lest that girl-power edict ruffle too many Vatican feathers, the summit leaders also decided that the monarch could marry a Roman Catholic if he/she wanted to, apparently settling a centuries-old Hatfield & McCoy-like feud. As head of the Church of England, you can’t be Catholic, mind you, but you can marry one. (If you happen to be the first-born child of the Windsor royal line, that is.) Can’t you just feel the discrimination melting away?
So, perhaps they have put off the question of ‘Why is there a monarchy at all?’ for another 300 years.
We Americans clearly pooh-poohed the idea of royalty in the Declaration of Independence and we don’t approve of religious tests for public office. We hate the idea of an official church. That’s a priority for us. So much so, the first part of the first sentence of the First Amendment of our beloved Bill of Rights reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion….”
Brits, on the other hand, accept their theocratic sham rulers with quiet dignity. Having a royal family to support and an official church to feign allegiance to are, well, a bother. But then again, it’s a way of keeping Catholics and fringe crazies out of your life. Just sing “God Save the Queen.” Pretend you care. That’s all that’s required. Chin up, cheerio.
Giving an official nod to the efficacy of the Duke and Duchess’ baby’s genitals — sure, that’s progress. Sort of like proclaiming equal rights for the Kardashian siblings.