Are there reasons, other than the fact that Prince Charles is the eldest of the Queens sons,should he be King?

Question

Thank you for answering, but, what I am trying to find out is whether there are any circumstances(other than his his death) in which someone else can take the throne. In other words I want to know if there is any other reason other than the fact that he is the first male child of the Queen or Is there another reason like he has to have a certain blood type, or hair color OR ANYTHING to be king????!

Answer 1

Doesn't matter, that's the ONLY reason.

Answer 2

He will be king and his wife will be queen. There is no restriction on a king marrying a divorced woman and the wife of a king is always queen. The king, however, rules at the request of the Parliament. Should the parliament decide that Charles is not to be king, they can offer the crown to anyone they like but they should be prepared for a civil war should they do so.

Once Charles is declared to be king, his wife is automatically queen as Britain does not recognise morganatic marriages. Of course Parliament can pass a law to recognise a morganatic marriage but there could be unwanted ramifications of doing so.

In any case, the Queen's mother was over 100 when she died. All her female ancestors back to Victoria outlived their husbands and had long lives. It is likely that the Queen could have another ten to twenty years on the throne. Charles is 60 next year and Camilla is older.If and when he comes to the throne, he won't be there long so why not just accept it?

Answer 3

Breathing along with membership in the Church of England are about the only qualifications for the heir apparent to the English Throne other than being the oldest surviving son of the reigning monarch*, a system of selection through primogeniture.

Of course, Robert the Bruce pleaded the tradition of tanstry when a candidate for the crown of Scotland in 1296, but this quasi-democratic way of selecting a king often led to rather bloody feuds and was abolished by James VI of Scotland upon succeeding to the English throne as James I of England.

------
*If there are no legitimate sons, the oldest daughter of the reigning monarch succeeds to the Throne.

Answer 4

That's ALL THE REASON HE NEEDS. : ) Even if Princess Anne were older, He would still inherit the Throne as a male with the females going last. Not fair, but that's how England has it set up.

There ARE NO RULES that can disqualify him unless he becomes Catholic! However, Prince Charles, trying to unify people has already hinted that he wouldn't mind being called "Defender of the Faith(S)" instead of "Defender of THE Faith."

Answer 5

Yes Charles should be king though Camilla Horse Face Parker Bowles should NEVER be queen. Tradition says that divorcee isn't supposed to take the throne.

There was only one TRUE queen and she died in that Paris tunnel.

Personally I think that William would make an excellent King. He has the compassion that Charles has never had. He takes after his mother in so many ways.

Answer 6

1. He's been in training for the job all of his life.
2. He's an environmentalist.
3. He loves his country and wants to see it be successful for generations to come.

Answer 7

Charles will never be King...if he was going to be King it would of happened when Lady Di was with him...

Answer 8

I don't think he can be King... I thought he gave up his rights to the throne when he got divorced and married Camilla?? I am probably wrong, but I think that is right... I don't think he should be king anyway... he's not very good looking, and since royalty is really all about your title, it'd be a shame to waste on him.... Anyway, Wills would be a much better candidate in my opinion :)

Answer 9

No afraid not, No way would he win a Popularity contest or an intelligence or personality contest so it comes down to his parentage

Answer 10

That's really the only requirement for the position.