You've come a long way, yet-to-maybe-be-born baby girl of Prince William and Kate Middleton -- if one British lawmaker has his way, that is.
Seeking to overturn a current 300-year-old British rule, lawmaker Keith Vaz recently suggested to fellow House of Common members that it is time to bring gender equality to the royal family and allow royal daughters born first to succeed to the throne. As the succession rules now stand, a daughter born first to a royal couple wouldn't be queen but instead would have to sit back and watch as a son born after her became king.
Such a change won't be easy -- all 16 Commonwealth countries where Queen Elizabeth II is head of state would have to agree -- but would be in line with polls showing support for the idea, Vaz said -- not to mention the more modern monarchy seemingly advocated by Prince William.
Though not everyone will be in favor of the idea, there's little doubt that women can lead just as well as men and have done so quite capably around the globe in assorted positions, both regal and not. (See: India's President Pratibha Patil and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, among others.)
We say it's about time that our friends on the other side of the pond catch up with modern sensibilities and overturn this centuries-old law. For those who say the monarchy itself is anarchistic anyway and has long outlived its purpose… well let's take it one step at a time.
Should a first-born daughter be allowed to succeed to the throne? Chime in below!
No comments:
Post a Comment