Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Should the British monarchy abolish male-preference for the succession?

0
Posted

Should the British monarchy abolish male-preference for the succession?

0

The British monarchy exists because it is tradition. As times have changed (as you put it) it’s really a terrible waste of money to keep supporting a monarchy that is not needed especially when that money can be used elsewhere. So to answer your question, if England keeps the monarchy for traditional reasons then they should keep the tradition of succession as it has always been.

0

It’s an interesting point, and there’s little defence can be made these days for sex-based preference in the inheritance line. Incidentally, I don’t think the monarchy costs all that much. The cost to the country comes from the Civil List, which is the cost of running the Royal Household and itself reflects the surrender by the Crown of the net surplus of the Crown Estate. Most of the Civil List is spent on wages for staff employed in the Royal Household, and it is not an income for the Royal Family itself, contrary to a fairly widespread misunderstanding in the public mind. The Civil List works out at around £8 million pounds a year. However, the Crown Estate pays the Treasury around £150 – 200 million in revenue surplus.

0

Apparently three other European nations had changed their succession law to Equal primogeniture, they are: Kingdom of the Netherlands Norway Kingdom of Belgium It is possible that Spain will eventually change their succession law as well since the birth of The Infanta Leonor of Spain daughter of Felipe, Prince of Asturias. Her birth has sparked discussion of a revision of the Spanish Constitution of 1978 to abolish the precedence of male heirs over their older sisters. In this case, she could become heir apparent when her father is king. Otherwise, she would be heiress presumptive until and unless her parents should have a son. Should she become Queen, she will be the first queen named Leonor of united Spain (Navarre had a Queen Eleanor in the 15th century). Hopefully, more and more European nations will see that women should be treated equally, and eventually when Prince William takes the throne, he will persuade the British parliament to change its current succession law.

0

YES, I really think that male-preference kind of succession should be abolished because come to think of it, most female monarchs or queens have done good for England and for present-day UK, and most of them lived long too. I also think that there should be equality among male and female successors, look at Princess Anne, just because she is female but second eldest child of Queen Elizabeth, she is the 9th in line to succession but if there was no male-primogeniture practice she should have been 4th in line.

0

It is time the monarchy moved with the times, the eldest child regardless of sex, should always be the more important. However, if they are mentally impaired or hooked on drugs so that they become incompetent obviously the next in line should be nominated.

Thanksgiving questions

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.