# Ask the American monarchist **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [September 30, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-american-monarchist/636323 "2012-09-30T18:44:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![anya\_marie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@anya\_marie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anya_marie)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2012, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-american-monarchist/636323/61 "2012-11-10T04:38:41Z")
What provision do you make for those subjects who do not choose to belong to the state church? Who else would be considered royal family? Would being the descendant of a president or someone who was a senator for 30 year, are they included? It seems to be a trend for people of royal descent to choose to marry people with no ties to existing royal families. These are just a couple examples. [ul] [li]Victoria, Crown Prices of Sweden and Daniel Westling[/li][li]Princess Madeleine of Sweden and Christopher O’Neill[/li][li]Crown Prince Haakon and Mette-Marit Tjessem Høiby[/li][/ul] I don’t know how much chance there is of another [Charles II](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_Spain) when modern medicine now has much more information about the effects of inbreeding and the chances of genetic defects. I do know that sometimes cousins marry, but Charles II seems to me to be a special case. It would take some coercion at the very least to achieve that now Check this out. [http://www.musitek.com/Public/Charles\_II\_Inbreeding.jpg](http://www.musitek.com/Public/Charles_II_Inbreeding.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Ms\_Boods](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5e9695/32.png) [@Ms\_Boods](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms_Boods)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2012, 9:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-american-monarchist/636323/62 "2012-11-10T09:52:06Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > I was born and raised in the US of A, but am for a combination of practical, aesthetic, and religious reasons a firm believer in the principle of hereditary monarchy with more than figurehead power. Although I tend to stay fairly quiet about my political opinions, and would probably get lynched if I flew the Union Jack on the Fourth of July, I do indeed exist. > > My favorite monarchs (although I do not necessarily agree with all of their actions) would be Charles I of England and Scotland, Nicholas II of Russia, and Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran. I seem to have a fondness for losers. I doubt anyone would give you grief for flying a Union flag on the 4th; I drove a Mini Cooper for nearly 8 years in the States with a Union flag on the roof, including noodling around town on the 4th for various reasons, and really never got a second glance. ---
**Author:** ![hildea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ebca7d/32.png) [@hildea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hildea)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2012, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-american-monarchist/636323/63 "2012-11-10T13:06:57Z")
> [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > First of all, despite Samuel’s misgivings, God did eventually command him to “Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king” (I Sam. 8:22), which could never have happened were monarchy evil in itself. I haven’t read that one before, but did so now – quite interesting. > [@I Sam. 8:22 paraphrased by me](#): > > The people of Israel to Samuel: We want a king! > Samuel to God: What should I do? > God: Tell Israel that if they get a king, he’ll oppress them (send their sons to war, heavy taxes, etc. etc.) > Israel: We still want a king! > God to Samuel: OK, give them what they want, but tell them not to come whining to me about the king later. So, it doesn’t necessarily say that monarchy is inherently evil, but it’s hardly a strong recommendation either. > [@Weeping\_Wyvern](#): > > In the Gospel according to St. Luke we see the angel Gabriel addressing the Blessed Virgin with these words: > _“Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him **the throne of his father David** : And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.”_ But according to the Bible, Jesus never sat on any throne during his life on earth. So either Gabriel was wrong, or he lied, or he was speaking metaphorically. Why should a mistaken, deceitful, or metaphorical statement hold any weight as a recommendation for government? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-american-monarchist/636323.md?page=3)