Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
TheBrownEyedPoet

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 86
Reply with quote  #1 
Still loyal to the Crown, but this should be interesting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290824/Queen-fights-gay-rights-Monarch-makes-historic-pledge-discrimination-hints-Kate-DOES-girl-means-equal-rights-throne.html

Any thoughts?
VivatReginaScottorum

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 368
Reply with quote  #2 
The article's headline is somewhat misleading. It's less a case of the Queen "fighting" for gay rights and more a case of the Queen rubberstamping a pointless document reminding everyone that the Commonwealth cares about human rights despite the fact that several of its member states evidently do not which just happens to include something that may be interpreted as a veiled reference to homosexuals. I don't really consider this major news.
__________________
That which concerns the mystery of the King's power is not lawful to be disputed; for that is to wade into the weakness of Princes, and to take away the mystical reverence that belongs unto them that sit in the throne of God. - James VI and I of England, Scotland and Ireland
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,100
Reply with quote  #3 
The Queen and her representatives in the Commonwealth realms have given assent to legislation we don't like, because in our Westminster democracies they are bound by duty to do so.
wainscottbl

Registered:
Posts: 158
Reply with quote  #4 
Whatever the case I will respond. I hope Theodore will forgive me if I cause any offense and I will temper my argument as best I can. 

1. Even if this is exaggerated and Her Majesty is not really "fighting" for gay rights, it still is bad that she would even give that idea. It gives scandal in the moral sense and she is violating her oath as "Defender of the Faith" I would say, though I of course am Catholic and so that title has no meaning to me. But she did make an oath did she not to be defender of her faith and does not her faith reject homosexuality? 

2. This gives fuel to the republicans, especially among traditional Catholics--please no trolling on the "traditionalist" issue and I direct this request to a certain person. I ask Theodore to back me up on this. I am not here to talk about traditional Catholicism and start an argument about it so I want to make that clear. But some traditional Catholics are no monarchists and are staunch republicans, especially in America. This just gives fuel to their argument. I direct this at TheBrownEyedPoet to be honest, who posted this. I just am trying to avoid pointless bickering over things that do not matter to the point, so please for everyone's sake do not put down "traditional Catholics". That is far too deep a topic. 

3. It is still wrong of Her Majesty. Whether you support the office of the Crown of not it is wrong and unfit to not be willing to criticise when the Crown does wrong. This is a common British fault, the British tending to be blindly patriotic and nationalistic, an error that carries over into the United States. The Anglo-American idea is: My country right or wrong. 

4. This will only do injury to the Crown, not help I assure you. I think getting rid of the shameful House of Windsor is worse. If Parliament takes over Britain will be no better than America. The Crown at least holds something together. I hop I may call them that, because really to me they make a mockery of the bravery of Charles I, who died for his principles. So they are shameful in the way they act. I still support them but like Sir Thomas More I must serve my principles first. That is myself, you see. I do not oppose this because of any of my appetites--not my pride, passion, or anything like that but I oppose this because I do. Is there in a monarchist no part that serves monarchy but is just a man? That serves his principles above his bias? That is myself and I should wish it to be the principle of everyone here. Her Majesty has not only done malice to her office and her oath, but she has done malice to the natural and divine law and it is very bad. Just as the various tyrannies of Henry VIII must be rightly criticised, so we must, even if we do it with respect, criticise this if we call ourselves Christian. Yes, I know some here do not call themselves Christian and may hold different views on homosexuality, but for those who do, they must serve justice and virtue before their bias or prejudice. 

Upon the whole a Christian monarchist must at least see this as bad. You can paint it in pretty colours all you want but the truth of the fact remains.

__________________
My most dear lord, king and husband,

The hour of my death now drawing on, the tender love I owe you forceth me, my case being such, to commend myself to you, and to put you in remembrance with a few words of the health and safeguard of your soul which you ought to prefer before all worldly matters, and before the care and pampering of your body, for the which you have cast me into many calamities and yourself into many troubles. For my part, I pardon you everything, and I wish to devoutly pray God that He will pardon you also. For the rest, I commend unto you our daughter Mary, beseeching you to be a good father unto her, as I have heretofore desired. I entreat you also, on behalf of my maids, to give them marriage portions, which is not much, they being but three. For all my other servants I solicit the wages due them, and a year more, lest they be unprovided for. Lastly, I make this vow, that mine eyes desire you above all things.

Katherine of Aragon, last letter to Henry
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,534
Reply with quote  #5 
It seems pointless to respond in detail to your inane ramblings, so I won't. I will point out that Catholic teaching on homosexuality is not dogmatic and Catholics are free to examine the facts and their own consciences and come to some different conclusion, while remaining faithful members of their Church. That means that you are responsible for your own bias and prejudice and the harm it causes, it is not just part and parcel of being Catholic. Your views on the issue are morally irresponsible and entirely wrong, and the fact that they echo those of the hierarchy does not excuse them.

Your views on the monarch and the royal house of my country are offensive not so much because they are critical, that is legitimate, but because they are offensively expressed. The 'shameful' House of Windsor? Make a case against them if you are capable of it, which I doubt, but refrain from slurs, please. Some monarchist you are, elsewhere praising the Islamic Republic of Iran and here condemning the United Kingdom. On the charter itself, I agree with VivatRegina, it is of no consequence. Though it might be argued that it is a bad thing in that it is completely anodyne and will do nothing to improve human rights in those Commonwealth nations that do not respect them, while allowing those that do to pretend that something has been done.
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,830
Reply with quote  #6 
I can't comment at length via mobile but this whole thing is ridiculous. The Queen said nothing a Catholic need object to. The media are making a mountain out of a molehill. I wish people would read the actual document and the actual speech instead of just irresponsibly sensationalist headlines.
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,345
Reply with quote  #7 
I am also a bit taken aback by the "shameful House of Windsor" comment.  Really?  What about them is shameful?  One's views about specific acts or persons being "shameful" is one thing, but to condemn the entire dynasty as shameful is very unusual, especially on a monarchist forum.  Perhaps you'd care to explain or restate that?  
__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
royalcello

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 6,830
Reply with quote  #8 
Sorry but he will not be as I just banned him. I love the House of Windsor and hate the IRI and will not apologize for either
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #9 

Her Majesty's faith rejects adultery.

She still loves her son, and he will still be King.

The faith rejects acts, not persons.

Hard to do in real life.

Still the required thing.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.