I think you rather undersell the duties of the position. If it were really as simple and easy as all that, a lot of countries would probably not bother electing ceremonial presidents either
Here in New Zealand we *don’t *bother holding elections for our head of state - the Prime Minister simply advises the Queen who to pick as Governor-General. The current one is a former army general. He’s from pretty humble origins and originally enlisted as a private.
He seems to have been opening schools and hospitals, and meeting and greeting foreign dignitaries pretty well.
if the heir to the throne is gay, would that be grounds for getting jumped over in the line of succession? the king of england is also head of the church of england which frowns on homosex, so how would that work? about ten years ago there were news reports prince charles might be gay and then the story just disappeared:p:p:p
There is no legal barrier to a homosexual being Sovereign. It may have been a serious concern at some point in the past, but nowadays I think if an heir was made to depart from the line of succession because of their sexuality would put the monarchy in serious jeopardy.
Having said that I think the established church (and not-established ones) would also be very, very upset at a homosexual monarch. So it would likely result in the disestablishment of the Church of England, or perhaps at the very least a very sudden alteration in Church doctrine!
Well yes, I suppose the story would disappear, what with the famously great love of his life for more than thirty years being a woman.
If the heir were retarded I expected they would quietly retire him to be replaced by a regent, and then the heir could register on an internet forum and post a constant stream of inane questions.
Here’s another question, then: if the regent is the next in line who is an adult, and somehow, then-King William dies while George is still a child, and Harry becomes regent, and at some point it becomes obvious that King George has a developmental disorder, and will always require a regent, what would happen if William and Kate Middleton had a second child? When that child became 18, would he (assuming it’s a boy) take over the regency from Harry, or is it “once regent, always regent,” unless the actual monarch takes over?
What does UK succession law have to say about adoption? If a gay King and his Prince consort adopted a kid, would that kid be the heir presumptive? What about a monarch with his/her own natural children who adopts someone older than his/her other kids? Would the adoptee become the new heir based on age, or would the biological kids take precedence?
As I understand it, the words “Heirs of Her Body” (in reference to the Electress Sophia) in the Act of Settlement exclude adopted children from the succession.
The child would not be of the Blood Royal, and so would not be in the succession, unless Parliament legislated to alter the succession, and as has been said, that would require consent of the other Commonwealth Realms.
the heir to the throne has to be a biological child, not adopted, and legitimate, not a bastard…prince albert of monaco has a bunch of bastard kids running around that will have no claim to the monaco throne
Well, Monaco has a history of illegitimate children being legitimated and then inheriting, but Albert is about to have a legitimate heir, so that isn’t going to happen. And even if the heir dies or is somehow unable to inherit, Albert’s sister and her children have been named his heirs already.
Under current UK law, adopted children are not in the line of succession to the throne (or indeed to titles of nobility). The law could be changed, of course, but that is cumbersome, for the reasons already pointed out.
