Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:19 pm  

kirkstaller wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9722268/Change-to-Royal-succession-law-agreed-by-Commonwealth-nations.html

There are 2 ways of approaching this issue:

1. Embrace tradition and uphold current succession policy.

2. Reject tradition, do away with the monarchy and become a republic.

Well clearly there are more choices than those two since neither of those has been adopted.
Simples ...
Besides women need a leg up, they are clearly inferior.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Sun Dec 09, 2012 1:04 pm  

I think Kirkstaller is right (For once).



I vote option two. Thanks for your support Kirky.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:28 am  

kirkstaller wrote:

... 21st Century liberal egalitarianism is afflicting our time-honoured traditions...

Just what is tradition?
It's a nice comfy way of assuring ourselves that things don't change.
If there's a good reason for the continuance of something, fair enough, that reason is the reason, not because it's "traditional".

Traditions that are merely "the way we've always done it" such as "traditional" turkey at Christmas or "something borrowed, something blue" at a wedding are harmless enough but tradition for its own sake without other good solid reasons is no way to run a country.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:50 am  

El Barbudo wrote:

... Traditions that are merely "the way we've always done it" such as "traditional" turkey at Christmas ...

Which comment makes the point nicely that many 'traditions' are hardly 'original', but themselves replaced something else.

Sort of like Yahweh usurping the traditional northern gods and Christians nicking Saturnalia and so on.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:08 pm  

It's traditional to discriminate against women.
We need to keep our traditions!
Ask any man ... well some men ... alright a few men ... alright brainwashed neanderthal men ....
It doesn't matter the point remains.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:12 pm  

If the child is female then she should be in line for the throne even if any born after are male.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:27 pm  

Ditching primogeniture but keeping the monarchy is like painting a crumbling wall in a nice modern colour.
It gives royal women a shot at the top job but changes absolutely nothing for the other 46 million of us who are supposedly the electorate but who are denied a democratic choice.

Yeah, how very up to date that is.
Whoop-de-doo.

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:11 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Ditching primogeniture but keeping the monarchy is like painting a crumbling wall in a nice modern colour.
It gives royal women a shot at the top job but changes absolutely nothing for the other 46 million of us who are supposedly the electorate but who are denied a democratic choice.

Yeah, how very up to date that is.
Whoop-de-doo.

What does the monarchy have to do with democracy? Last time I checked, Li didn't make any decisions (other what colour hat to wear etc.?)

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:37 pm  

Standee wrote:

What does the monarchy have to do with democracy? Last time I checked, Li didn't make any decisions (other what colour hat to wear etc.?)

Doesn't the monarch still have some power via the Privy Council?

Re: Royal succession - chipping away at tradition : Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:50 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Doesn't the monarch still have some power via the Privy Council?

If so, it will be incredibly limited and extremely unlikely to be used.

I seem to remember we have a tradition of burning witches and selling "coloured" people into slavery, maybe kirkstller thinks changing that wasn't a good idea either?