To ask if all those singing “god save the king” outdoor be as enthusiastic if Andrew were acceding

[HermioneWeasley]

The point of monarchy is that you get who you’re given. If there had been a small twist of fate - Andrew born first or Charles killed before he had kids, how would you feel about Andrew being our next head of state?

YABU - I embrace everything and everyone that comes with monarchy and would loudly sign for Andrew’s long reign

YANBU - I’m less keen on a paedophile enabling alleged rapist as my head of state, and that makes me think monarchy might be a bad way of choosing our head of state

If Andrew was taking the throne it would be a whole different ball game right now. The enthusiasm of how people would sing God save the king would be the last thing to worry about.

Ahhhh, hypothetical questions. What fun.

Parliament would order him to Abdicate. HTH.

But Anne is older than Andrew isn’t she??

Anne would accede after Andrew then Edward.

We have had some deeply flawed Kings already, Henry 8th was no peach

George III was insane. Hence the Regency.

Having sex with a 17 year old doesn’t make someone a paedophile. Paedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children, which a 17 year old is not. 17 is also above the age of consent in this country. The legal issue in that case was whether she was trafficked and therefore rape. I wish people would get this right, it does matter.

Your polarised voting options are ridiculous. It's possible to support a monarchy in general without supporting Andrew. Steps would have been taken by the Queen to ensure Andrew would not have become King, had that been on the cards. Just as she changed the constitution to eradicate sexism in the succession.

So just checked, Anne IS older than Andrew but he is more important as he has a penis.

Wow, just when I thought the RF couldn’t get any more outdated

If Andrew had been the heir instead of the spare, so much of his life up to that point would have been different too, and I expect we would have seen a very different man to the weak, spoiled brat he turned out to be.

But yeah, you take rough with smooth in terms of the succession - look at the whole sweep of monarchical history of these Isles. There's been both the dodgy and the great (and by 'dodgy' I mean anything from murderous)

And one can still respect the office whilst heartily wishing the current incumbent had never been anywhere near it (a feeling that is not limited to monarchs in this country)

What power would they have to enforce that?

Edward VIII was a twat and a Nazi. Luckily he wanted to marry someone unacceptable so Parliament pushed him towards Abdication.

It works. Parliament checks the Monarchy and vise versa. Balance.

Anne wouldn’t have precedence - the change in the succession rules wasn’t applied retrospectively. She still ranks below all her brothers and their children.

I agree with the idea that he would have been forced to abdicate.

That’s been changed now.

She is ,they have changed it now so that Charlotte is front of Louis and had she been born first she would have been first in line, but I don't think it works retrospectively?

If Andrew was born first maybe wouldn't have had time for all his dubious activities and would have kept better company. So the situation with Epstein would at least never have arisen.
He'd still be King Twat though.

Pointless tasteless thread

Using what law? I get that all sorts of people and institutions can put pressure on a bad queen/king to abdicate but what happens if they just refuse?

Well done for being brave enough to clarify this. You are correct.
Sleazy: yes
Paedo: No
BTW Anne would make a terrific Queen, didn't Prince Philip call her the son he never had ?😀
She is ballsy and straight to the point. I love her

You do know that it's been changed now?

Though only for those born after the date of the changes.

Male primogeniture was the predominant arrangement for many countries for many centuries. We weren't the first to abolish, but we're not the last, either.

And at least we had Salic Law.

We rarely have any say in our leaders though. I didn’t vote conservative at the last election and those that did wouldn’t have been expecting Truss, or Boris for that matter. Is it being hereditary better or worse? Also unfair to judge someone on the actions of their siblings.

Is it being hereditary better or worse?

Worse. How can anyone think otherwise?

Why do you know about Prince Andrew? Why were Prince Harry’s shenanigans front-page news? I doubt it was because the eldest children are better behaved …

They have that power as Parliament. They could be subtle about it (suggest you abdicate before stuff is leaked to the Press.......).

Edward VIII was manoeuvred into it easily enough.