Do you think Britain could have an openly gay monarch soon?

You apparently never heard of the laws of succession that determine who gets to be monarch.

Next in line for the throne is the Queen's eldest son, Prince Charles.

After Charles, the crown will pass to his eldest son Prince William.

Now that William and Kate are expecting a child, their child will be king or queen after William.

Maybe that child will be gay. Maybe not. We'll never know.

That's because by the time the crown passes to that boy or girl, it'll be so many decades from that that we'll have all died of old age.

Adopted children cannot inherit thrones, and a successor to a throne must have been born in wedlock -- that is, his or her biological parents must have been married. Egg and sperm donors create problems with that.

The Queen Mother's liberal attitude towards gay people is irrelevant to the succession. There can be no doubt that all members of the royal family have known, and in some cases been friendly with, gay people, but that doesn't really matter to the question you are asking.

Now, there won't be an openly gay monarch any time "soon," because the next two people in line are not gay. But certainly there could be one in the future. The issue would be producing an heir, but as you've pointed out, a king or queen regnant doesn't have to be succeeded by a child. A gay monarch could be succeeded by a niece or nephew or sibling or cousin.

You may be interested to know that there were gay monarchs in the past, and everyone knew it. They were problematic, and one was deposed, but he probably would have been fine if he'd not flaunted his male favorites and treated his wife so badly.

The UK doesn't have gay marriage but it might someday. Some Commonwealth nations might choose to leave the Commonwealth, but many of the Commonwealth nations may do that anyway.

So, a gay monarch could reign, he or she even might be able to marry a gay partner, but it's not going to happen any time soon.

There have been numerous gay monarchs already - James VI and Queen Anne come to mind. They were not "out" but they were certainly gay. Both monarch married and had children. If a gay monarch, or any monarch for that matter, were to adopt a child or have a child through any method other than lawful wedlock they would be ineligible to the throne. The throne would pass to the next in line, possible a brother or cousin.

There is no law which bars gay people from the throne, nor is it likely there will ever be one given the growing acceptance of gays and lesbians in society. It would be a human rights scandal if such a law were passed, if an Heir Apparent were openly gay. There would be a constitutional crisis.

it rather is an thrilling question. If there replaced into an overtly gay Monarch interior the united kingdom, i do no longer think of it would reason a controversy even though it would create replace. as an occasion, if gay marriage replaced into approved what might the husband be talked approximately as? may well be made a Prince? A Royal Duke? And standard as a Member of the Royal kin? Weddings as an occasion would not be celebrated in Church and what approximately any babies from that union? might they receive a place interior the line of succession. The question poses ability replace for right here. a million. the relationship of Monarchy and church. 2. The identify acceptable Head of the Church of britain for a gay guy. 3. gay Marriage and the Royal kin. 4. The Reform of nobility and nobility while it is composed of gay unions. individually, i think of a concern like this might have helpful outcomes. i think of that Church and state may well be separated with the Archbishop of Canterbury because of the fact the acceptable head of the Church. The Church might then replace into an entity via itself and quietly fade away into the historic past. because of the fact there may well be no association i.e. registry workplace wedding ceremony. it rather is not likely that a gay Monarchy may well be rather non secular (besides the undeniable fact that it rather is available). because of the fact the King is the fount of honour, he could desire to create a sparkling status for the spouses of gay friends i.e. The Duke of X's husband might replace into The Duke of X aswell which capacity a "Duke via marriage". in addition the husband of a Sir may well be a Lord like the spouse of a Sir is a woman. So Sir Elton Johns husband might replace into Lord David furnish. there are a number of possibilities, yet i think of certainly one of those Monarch might carry helpful connotations.

Yes, as a British person I think that a gay monarch would probably make the monarchy seem more relevant to young people. I'm not sure what the reaction would be in the wider Commonwealth but the UK govt. and monarchy would be more concerned with appearing not to discriminate against gays than the reaction of other countries.

I'm pretty sure that a sperm donor baby would be accepted as the heir, and I'd be surprised if the new rules didn't make provision for adopted children.

Well, the 2nd in line, Charles, isn't gay, and neither is his son, the 3rd in line. William's child would be the next potential gay Royal in line, and, even if they were (a small chance), they would not be monarch for many yeas from now - probably 60 or so, possibly a lot more.

We'll worry about it when the time comes!

Well certain commonwealth states would be outraged not to mention the actual british people. But in other states like Belize which has lesbian mayors or Australia which has an atheist prime minister they won't mind.

I'd say right now that 90% of people probably wouldn't mind or would think it's progressive. Homosexuality isn't a taboo subject these days.

No, as there is no one openly gay who is in the direct line for the throne...or even indirectly.

Possible. But not in the Queen E's time.