Of course the Monarch doesn’t exist just to reproduce.
The consort exists just to reproduce.
Firstly, no one will give two hoots as to his sexuality as long as he behaves with decorum. Secondly, the rules of succession are well-established and the throne will pass to Charlotte or her heirs if he has no children of his own. And if Charlotte has no heirs the throne will pass to Louis and his heirs.
Then Prince George’s County will have to have its own gay pride parade.
If he was also a cross dresser, would they sing God Save The Queen?
Does it make any difference to the succession if he were to adopt?
Regards,
Shodan
If Michael Jackson can manage it, so can George.
I doubt very much if adopted children would be eligible for the line of succession.
They aren’t. Succession rules are very defined, only legitimate biological children are potential heirs. That’s why in generations past queens and princesses gave birth surrounded by witnesses.
Agreeing with others – by 2040 it will be irrelevant if the monarch is gay or even if not being gay is known that s/he will leave no offspring. The laws regarding succession already provide for the contingency of a monarch’s death wthout issue and those are merely special cases within that contingency. If George, whatever his orientation, comes up to the crown while still unmarried and childless, an Heir Presumptive will already exist in Charlotte or whoever is alive and in the proper place in the line so the aspect of dynastic continuity is already covered.
Not to mention Anne; whether or not she was gay (her relationship with Sarah Churchill was talked about even in her own day), she certainly did her progenitive duty and gave birth at least 17 times–all stillbirths or babies who died in infancy, poor little things, and one son, William Duke of Gloucester who managed to live until his 11th birthday.
All of this was behind Anne by the time she came to the throne, when it was generally assumed she was no longer going to produce her own heir. The succession was settled on her distant but Protestant cousin Sophia of Hanover, or Sophia’s son George.
Unfortunately for us, we know for a fact that Charles loves the inside of a vagina
Indeed, as UDS has alluded to, James I/VI was the fourth consecutive British/English monarch who died without children. After Henry VIII died his son Edward became king and…
Edward VI died in 1553, just 15 years old, of illness. He was succeeded by…
His Half sister Mary, who died in 1558 at age 42, likely of cancer, and childless. She was succeed by…
Her half sister Elizabeth I, who never marreied or had children, and died age 70 in 1603 and was succeeded by…
James VI of Scotland and James I of England, Elizabeth I’s cousin.
James I/VI might well have been gay, though in fairness he did seem to be really fond of his wife at first. Perhaps bisexual. It’s theoretically possible Elizabeth was gay, and of course Edward VI might have been gay but as he died young it hardly mattered.
James I/VI had children–Prince Henry, who died young, Charles I, and Elizabeth of Bohemia (mother of Prince Rupert and the Sophia I mentioned above) and others.
Plus of course, Parliament can at any time designate whomever they want as Sovereign, and designate whomever they want as the next in line for succession, so, assuming no emergency and that Parliament and King George at least roughly agree, they can deal with the question when it comes up, either with a one-off Act covering a particular person, or by changing the rules of succession going forward.
Okay, kidding aside, would a gay George IV, having fallen in love with Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John, be permitted to take him (ZJLF-J) as Prince Consort, with an implied “Fuck it, Charlotte and her line can take over” attitude, or would he be forced to do a Duke of Windsor thing?
This is really more a “Defender of the Faith” issue than a “consort as Royal broodmare” question.
Correction: George VII.
I reckon the royals & their people would see a gay king as a great thing to point to as a ‘look, we’re still with the times’ sort of thing. As people have said, the succession is secure enough to survive a shedload of royals dying at once, one gay guy ain’t gonna break it.
I’d prefer it were a lesbian queen though, two kings is just too restrictive, all the other monarchies would be check mating us all over the place.
Maybe people will laugh at Jerry Seinfeld’s gay king joke if there’s a real gay king — https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/news/a35610/jerry-seinfeld-politically-correct-gay-king-joke/
You have my attention. What was the other series?
Probably just marry him civilly and give him a title like Duke of (wherever) and never mention “prince consort”. So HELLO! Magazine would be writing “Everyone waited for the arrival of HIs Majesty and the Duke of Brexitstrand who entered just in time, both looking dashing and fabulous, with the Duke exchanging a sly smile with the King as the applause went on and on”.
I expect that whatever churches would leave the AngCom (abroad) or split from the CoE (at home) over this srt of thing would have done so anyway long before that happened.