
The Act of Settlement and what it means
The Act of Settlement was created by the parliament of England in 1700 to ensure that Electress Sophia of Hanover, a granddaughter of James I, and her Protestant heirs succeeded to the throne.
The Act was passed in 1701 and later extended to Scotland under terms of the Acts of Union in 1707.
It remains the main Act of Parliament governing the succession to the thrones of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth Realms. The Act stated that only the descendants of Sophia who were Protestant and had not married a Roman Catholic could
rule.
This stipulation within the act lives on, meaning Roman Catholics and those who marry Roman Catholics are forever barred from ascending the throne.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Donald Anderson, glasgow on 7:59am Wed 26 Mar 08
Why bother arguing about who can become an English Queen?
Independence is the Devine answer.
Why bother arguing about who can become an English Queen?
Independence is the Devine answer.
Posted by: allymax, yuk on 6:38pm Wed 26 Mar 08
I said it yesterday, and I still think this way, even more so now that Bean-Broon wants to abolish the 'act of settlement'.
I believe Bean-Broon has a hidden agenda. I beleive his agenda is to break up the union, and force Scotland to independence. I know this sounds a bit contraversial, but if we look at the things he's saying and doing I can't believe anybody can be that stupid.
He's forcing a 'commission' on Scotland that everybody can see is purly another NuNaziLab whitewash. so, inadvertantly, he's saying that Scotland does need more powers; independence ? He riled the engerlish queen by saying that all britishers should take a pledge to the engelrlish monarchy. Inadvertantly, he made the Scots aware they have no monarch; Scottish sovereignty available now? He allowed bendy wendy to get off scot-free with the donation scandal; further miring the NuNaziLab in Scotland with corruption and sleaze. And, wendy as the dead-duck in the political waters. Would you vote for a corrupt politician to rule your country? This means the Scottish die-hard voters of Labour are turning to the SNP in droves now, they won't vote for tories or libs because their fathers and mothers never would; a very clever plan to gain support for a referendum on independence come 2010 and force the hand of the engerlish tories to include it in their mnanifesto when it wins westminster 2010 general election. He now wants to abolish the 'act of settlement'. What this means is that the jacobite lineage of Scottish monarchy next in line for Scottish throne at Scone is the descendents of James II. In-deed, the act of settlement was contrived to prevent the Jacobites from ascending to the vacant Scottish throne.
I can realistically see no other reason for his actions; as I said, no-one can be that stupid.
I said it yesterday, and I still think this way, even more so now that Bean-Broon wants to abolish the 'act of settlement'.
I believe Bean-Broon has a hidden agenda. I beleive his agenda is to break up the union, and force Scotland to independence. I know this sounds a bit contraversial, but if we look at the things he's saying and doing I can't believe anybody can be that stupid.
He's forcing a 'commission' on Scotland that everybody can see is purly another NuNaziLab whitewash. so, inadvertantly, he's saying that Scotland does need more powers; independence ? He riled the engerlish queen by saying that all britishers should take a pledge to the engelrlish monarchy. Inadvertantly, he made the Scots aware they have no monarch; Scottish sovereignty available now? He allowed bendy wendy to get off scot-free with the donation scandal; further miring the NuNaziLab in Scotland with corruption and sleaze. And, wendy as the dead-duck in the political waters. Would you vote for a corrupt politician to rule your country? This means the Scottish die-hard voters of Labour are turning to the SNP in droves now, they won't vote for tories or libs because their fathers and mothers never would; a very clever plan to gain support for a referendum on independence come 2010 and force the hand of the engerlish tories to include it in their mnanifesto when it wins westminster 2010 general election. He now wants to abolish the 'act of settlement'. What this means is that the jacobite lineage of Scottish monarchy next in line for Scottish throne at Scone is the descendents of James II. In-deed, the act of settlement was contrived to prevent the Jacobites from ascending to the vacant Scottish throne.
I can realistically see no other reason for his actions; as I said, no-one can be that stupid.
Posted by: Donald Anderson, glasgow on 6:55am Thu 27 Mar 08
I can realistically see no other reason for his actions; as I said, no-one can be that stupid.[quote]quote[/quote] Have you ever spoken to a Labourite?
I can realistically see no other reason for his actions; as I said, no-one can be that stupid.
quote
Have you ever spoken to a Labourite?
Posted by: allymax, yuk on 7:52pm Thu 27 Mar 08
Hi Donald, 'have I ever spoken to a Labourite'? Well, that's a rhetorical question I hope my friend; they can't answer a question, nor speak in a communicative manner. They are drilled to avoid communicating, rather, they follow the Bliarite mandate of 'difuse, distract, deviate'.
You know, sometimes I really can't believe that these Bliarites are that stupid! One of them, (I thought it was Bean-Broon), must surely see their policies are the end of the party itself.
I used to think that Bliar was mad, now I think he tried to get us to believe we were mad. Are they still playing this old game?
Hi Donald, 'have I ever spoken to a Labourite'? Well, that's a rhetorical question I hope my friend; they can't answer a question, nor speak in a communicative manner. They are drilled to avoid communicating, rather, they follow the Bliarite mandate of 'difuse, distract, deviate'.
You know, sometimes I really can't believe that these Bliarites are that stupid! One of them, (I thought it was Bean-Broon), must surely see their policies are the end of the party itself.
I used to think that Bliar was mad, now I think he tried to get us to believe we were mad. Are they still playing this old game?
Posted by: bluenose, Glasgow on 7:35am Fri 28 Mar 08
As can be deduced by moniker here my allegiances to the beautiful game lie on the south side of Glasgow .
It is also fair to assume that I am not in a majority , indeed many of my fellow supporters ridicule my SNP leanings with such comments as Jacobite etc all petty and rather mundane however that is the nature of the argument against my political beliefs .
Their main reason for hanging on to "Britishness" is the very same Act of Settlement , Brown removes this and he removes the last vestige of their reason to be British (yes life is that petty in the West of Scotland)
Let me also say before the lot from the east end enter the fray with cheap comments their position is even more confusing to me their "majority" spout for an Independent Ireland and the end of the 6 counties yet in their own way they are more "British" than their sworn enemy the "Huns"!!!
They are the biggest advocates of remaining in the UK and vote for Nu Liebour more than anyone .
Back to Govan can anyone answer this for me if all the Rangers fans swear to be loyal Tory/Unionists and and yet we have never had a Tory in Larkhall how can that be???
As can be deduced by moniker here my allegiances to the beautiful game lie on the south side of Glasgow .
It is also fair to assume that I am not in a majority , indeed many of my fellow supporters ridicule my SNP leanings with such comments as Jacobite etc all petty and rather mundane however that is the nature of the argument against my political beliefs .
Their main reason for hanging on to "Britishness" is the very same Act of Settlement , Brown removes this and he removes the last vestige of their reason to be British (yes life is that petty in the West of Scotland)
Let me also say before the lot from the east end enter the fray with cheap comments their position is even more confusing to me their "majority" spout for an Independent Ireland and the end of the 6 counties yet in their own way they are more "British" than their sworn enemy the "Huns"!!!
They are the biggest advocates of remaining in the UK and vote for Nu Liebour more than anyone .
Back to Govan can anyone answer this for me if all the Rangers fans swear to be loyal Tory/Unionists and and yet we have never had a Tory in Larkhall how can that be???
Posted by: Donald Anderson, glasgow on 8:28am Fri 28 Mar 08
Nor Brigtoon neiher. Then voting Liebour always has been a safe act for these "republicans". Liebour is a royal, loyal, onionist and true brit vote, certainly not a "socialist" one. When were Reid, Wilson, Connolly and co ever republican or socialist?
Time for all blue and green pinnochio noses to wise up and support a Scottish team, like the Harry Rags.
Nor Brigtoon neiher. Then voting Liebour always has been a safe act for these "republicans". Liebour is a royal, loyal, onionist and true brit vote, certainly not a "socialist" one. When were Reid, Wilson, Connolly and co ever republican or socialist?
Time for all blue and green pinnochio noses to wise up and support a Scottish team, like the Harry Rags.
Posted by: rob4i, Scottish Borders on 2:31am Sat 12 Apr 08
When you see acts of settlement like that, it brings the 21st century answer, separate Independent Republics!!
When you see acts of settlement like that, it brings the 21st century answer, separate Independent Republics!!
