This was in yesterday's Times:

And this in the Telegraph two days ago:
I think that Vera Baird is completely right. I can see no reason not to change this rule. It is very much out of date and utterly absurd in the modern world.

In its time, the rules were fine and acceptable - if not absolutely necessary. But the time when the monarch was expected to actually run the country and to lead armies in the field is long long gone. There is no need for the monarch to be specifically male. And the past fifty-odd years of Queen Elizabeth IIs reign has proven it.

And as for the restriction over marrying a Catholic? Why do we we have this ridiculous law any more? It is a relic of the Glorious Revolution. It's about time, after 320 years, to repeal it.

How are either of these at all justifiable in the modern world?!

Just a note: This isn't the first time I have supported these modernisation.

Britain is a nation of monarchists, with 80% wanting Britain to retain it's monarchy. I am not in the slightest bit surprised by this, as the monarchy is on the whole well-regarded by the people of Britain.

Also, the monarchy is a good thing for this country, as it keeps a constant and recognisable national figurehead. It also keeps us away from the need for a President, which would either (a) require a complete and unnecessary reorganisation of our entire political system to fit the idea of a Head of State with powers in, or (b) be a completely and utterly pointless position. Neither of these would, in my opinion, be a good idea.

For at least the foreseeable future, if not far far beyond that, there will be a monarchy in Britain. They are far too embedded into the very fabric of this nation to be removed.

Source: BBC

There is one group which it is still legal to discriminate against in Britain - Catholics. Under the 1701 Act of Settlement, no British monarch may be or marry a Catholic. To do so would require abdication. This has come into the news because Peter Phillips, the Queen's eldest grandson and tenth in line to the throne, may well have to renounce his right to the succession because his fiancée is Catholic.

Why is this acceptable in modern Britain? Even though the monarch may be by right "Supreme Governor of the Church of England" that can, and should be changed anyway - it should be something that the C of E can choose to offer to the monarch if they so wish. Britain is a secular nation now - the Church of England and all other religions should be removed from our governmental system and the C of E should be independent. The right of the Prime Minister to select bishops and archbishops is very much outdated, and the very position of the Church of England is out of sync with our society and laws.

Discrimination is discrimination. Really, the whole hereditary system needs to be overhauled, with women not being automatically discriminated against any more than Catholics. I support the monarchy as a whole, but some changes/modernisations are essential.

Source: The Telegraph