Gordon Brown committed to ending anomaly of royal ban on Catholics

[Strong Atheist]

From marrying into the Royal family:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/27/gordon-brown-royal-succession

[truebrit71]

1. Nope, sorry but that is bad idea...plus...

..Gordo should concentrate on lining up a new job after he gets his arse kicked out next year...and leave this sort of stuff alone...

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Why a bad idea?

Though it has been suggested that the government thought it would give them a bit of a break to get the news to talk about something that the vast majority of Britons think is a good idea, rather than failing economies etc.

[truebrit71]

4. Hard to be a defender of the faith (the C of E) if you're married to a Catholic...

..

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Why?

Do you catch Catholic lurgies at night? Is dogma now sexually transmitted?

[truebrit71]

6. There is a very good reason this rule is in place...

...you cannot simultaneously defend the Protestant faith while at the same time be married to someone who answers to Rome...Conflict of interest much?

Gordo needs to polish up his CV and leave this one well enough alone...

[Goblinmonger]

7. You theocracies are whacked.

Plus I thought the royal family was just a figurehead that you trotted out once in a while to wave and then put them back. It's not like they have any real power, right? I mean if the Queen actually used her veto power Parliament would just end the monarchy wouldn't they?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. So you do believe in Catholic lurgy, then

Wow, I didn't know there were Puritans still left in the world.

[redqueen]

9. Defend the Protestant faith? Seriously?

This one isn't going to be left alone, because only 15% of the Brits polled share your opinion.

[truebrit71]

10. ..and of course it is soooooooooo much more important than the economy...the environment..

...the wars right?

He is focusing on COMPLETELY the wrong things...what a wanker...

[redqueen]

11. I didn't know he was dedicating more of his time to this than those. (nt)

[JerseygirlCT]

12. Why would that be a conflict?

My husband and I certainly don't share the same religion. It's not like I'm about to change my mind because of him, or vice versa.


I think actually, what's needed is a complete disconnect between the CofE and the monarchy. Time to remove the Royals from the church's business entirely.

[moggie]

15. Let me fix that for you

Time to remove the Royals from the church's business entirely.

Really, why are we still humouring these over-privileged inbred idiots? They don't even function very well as celebs any more.

[Why Syzygy]

16. Then who would be around to bestow knighthood on

our Senators and Presidents? And rock stars.

[moggie]

17. Perhaps America could buy the whole family?

Your country seems to like rich people with no sense, so I'm sure something could be arranged. You'd probably have to let Canada borrow the queen occasionally.

[JerseygirlCT]

20. We're broke, haven't you heard?

:D

[moggie]

21. Actually, those knighthoods aren't valid anyway

We're not supposed to mention this, but knighthoods for foreigners are awarded by one of the stunt queens, not the real one. So they're worthless.

[JerseygirlCT]

22. That's quite a makeup job, then. What's his name? nt

[JerseygirlCT]

19. How about the PM?

(I'm fairly sure you were joking, but still...)

[Why Syzygy]

23. lol. I wasn't joking.

:sarcasm: yes. Joke no. What about the PM?

[JerseygirlCT]

24. Couldn't the PM take over that ceremonial duty?

I don't see why a homely old lady in a big hat is needed. Or an awkward looking older man, if that old lady ever goes...

[Why Syzygy]

25. Have to relay that one to moggie.

I don't know the rules. I just know that some of the . um . what to call them . "informers" of NWO, etc. that hail from the isles think it is outrageous for US representatives to bow to the queen.

[JerseygirlCT]

26. As it is, actually

Her majesty not being our queen at all.

And if we put aside all the silliness, it's a bit strange to bow to anyone who holds a position by dint of birth!

But we Americans are quite in love with the *idea* of royalty (myself certainly not excepted - as a younger person who still had a memory -lol- I could recite every king and queen of England all the way through. As history, it's really hard to beat).

[JerseygirlCT]

18. Well, Wills is pretty cute. The rest of them, not so much

They really serve no useful purpose now, do they? Could they not continue their charity work as private citizens?

[rug]

14. That title was awarded to the English monarch by the Pope in 1521.

[T_i_B]

13. No it's a bad law that we would do well to abolish

Anti-Catholic legislation has actually done a great deal of damage to this country in the past and I don't see how marrying a Catholic is a) a bad thing anyway and b) prevents the royals from doing their duties.

I'm with Gordon Brown on this one for once.

[jody]

27. I understand and agree for all the reasons you gave in this thread. n/t

[dipsydoodle]

2. That goes back to James 2nd who was a Catholic

Soon as he was booted out it was decided no more Catholics in the Royal Family. Since then nobody has bothered to change the rules / policy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_II_of_England

[Solon]

28. Should be scrapped and I doubt it would be enforcable in today's environment anyways...

Its extremely silly that such a law is still on the books.