• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Announcement

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by PhiltheGreek View Post
    WTF?

    It's a hereditary monarchy, even you should be able to join the dots on this one.
    just skip a generation.
    Another car crash maybe?

    Bettie might outlive him just to spite him for the Diana debacle.
    See You Next Tuesday

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by Lance View Post
      just skip a generation.
      Another car crash maybe?

      Bettie might outlive him just to spite him for the Diana debacle.
      Not allowed.

      Charles would have to abdicate first.
      "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
        Not allowed.

        Charles would have to abdicate first.
        An Act of Parliament would do the trick. It worked for James II (James VII of Scotland).

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
          Not allowed.

          Charles would have to abdicate first.
          He can't abdicate as that would make Andrew the Twat the new King.
          He could immediately invoke regency then f*** off to Cornwall and die quietly.
          See You Next Tuesday

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by Lance View Post
            He can't abdicate as that would make Andrew the Twat the new King.
            He could immediately invoke regency then f*** off to Cornwall and die quietly.
            No. William is second in line to the throne.

            Edward VIII was forced to abdicate by the government, and he largely had the support of the common folk. With Brian being so unpopular with the general public and government, the government might decide that he be forced to abdicate.
            Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
              No. William is second in line to the throne.

              Edward VIII was forced to abdicate by the government, and he largely had the support of the common folk. With Brian being so unpopular with the general public and government, the government might decide that he be forced to abdicate.
              In favour of Jacob Rees Mogg's nanny.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by NotAllThere View Post
                No. William is second in line to the throne.

                Edward VIII was forced to abdicate by the government, and he largely had the support of the common folk. With Brian being so unpopular with the general public and government, the government might decide that he be forced to abdicate.
                Yes William is 2nd in line. But if Big Ears abdicates he gives up his, and his heirs right to the throne. Doesn't he?

                Edward VIII had no heirs so not a precedent that backs up my argument though. In fact there isn't a precedent so it would be a 'constitutional crisis' in the press.

                This the closest precedent I guess... "In June 2014, King Juan Carlos of Spain announced his intent to abdicate in favor of his son, Felipe." - Source Wikipedia- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdication

                But I am not a hereditary lineage, monarchical constitutional law expert.
                See You Next Tuesday

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by Lance View Post
                  Yes William is 2nd in line. But if Big Ears abdicates he gives up his, and his heirs right to the throne. Doesn't he?

                  Edward VIII had no heirs so not a precedent that backs up my argument though. In fact there isn't a precedent so it would be a 'constitutional crisis' in the press.

                  This the closest precedent I guess... "In June 2014, King Juan Carlos of Spain announced his intent to abdicate in favor of his son, Felipe." - Source Wikipedia- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdication

                  But I am not a hereditary lineage, monarchical constitutional law expert.
                  No. James II 'abdicated' in a non-voluntary way and his daughter became Queen. Edward VII abdicated IIRC on behalf of himself and any future children.

                  Anyway, there is no precedent needed as Parliament would just pass an act defining the succession. This is all very silly anyway. If you believe in a hereditary monarchy, you need to accept that sometimes you'll get a duffer.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by northernladyuk View Post
                    If you believe in a hereditary monarchy
                    I don't. Well I believe they exist, but also that they should not.

                    Originally posted by northernladyuk View Post
                    you need to accept that you'll always get a parasite.
                    FTFY
                    See You Next Tuesday

                    Comment


                      #30
                      F'kin IT nerds - it's not going to happen! Stop fretting about edge cases and concentrate on the happy path like the business wants

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X