Quote:
Kinich Ahau wrote
Why does the monarch have to be head of the bloody church? Wouldn't it be easier just to end that tradition?
|
For fuck's sake man - we can't have you talking sense and agreeing with
semi-reputable press!
Quote:
|
Slowly but steadily, some of our more obvious constitutional absurdities are being pruned back. First, the Commonwealth agreed a few weeks ago to allow the monarch to marry a Roman Catholic. Yesterday, MPs on the political and constitutional reform committee pointed out that any future heir raised as a Catholic would face an "obvious difficulty" to becoming head of the Church of England. Of course it would, so why should the monarch have to be the supreme governor of the Anglican church? Such questions should not be the sole prerogative of aggressive secularists.
|
This rather obvious little bit of nonsense is drawing some interesting flak and hopefully be the forerunner of the end of some of the 'constitutional absurdities' - some call it
a can of worms, whilst others want to cling to
some of the old wreckage. Whatever happens, the status quo will not be retained and at least one piece of residual bullshit will be wiped from our little country's arse.