This source posits that the succession to the British throne is ultimately in the hands of the Parliament, not the queen or royal family.

The news source considers an important counter argument to bypass Prince Charles in the succession, that even though he (re-) married a divorced woman, Lady Camilla Parker Bowles, he has a lot more experience as a royal than his son and daughter in law, and would therefore make a better monarch.

The British government was an important factor in the abdication of King Edward VIII because of his marriage to Wallace Simpson. Could it, in theory, step in to prevent the ascension, or cause the early abdication of King Charles III, even though it is not likely to do so?

  • 2
    Another starting point might be the linked article itself that explains why the rumour is without merit.
    – Oddthinking
    Jul 3 '14 at 3:53
  • 1
    First, Edward VIII was not legally forced to abdicate. He was essentially persuaded to abdicate to prevent a constitutional crisis. Similarly Charles could not be forced to abdicate. The issue with Edward VIII was two-fold - that divorce was not permitted at the time in the Church of England (of which Edward and Charles were/will be heads) and the general acceptability of divorce. Both those situations have changed enormously since 1936. Jul 3 '14 at 15:55
  • 1
    @TomAu: Ah, if that is the substance of the question, it needs to be closed. There will be some pressure for him to resign for a multitude of reasons. (I will add my voice to the mix, for his unskeptical and unethical views of medicine.) However, we can't know if whether he would choose to do so - it would be pure speculation.
    – Oddthinking
    Jul 3 '14 at 16:49
  • 1
    @TomAu "Peer pressure" <-- I see what you did there. Jul 3 '14 at 19:38
  • 5
    Okay, so the claim now is: "While Prince Charles is next in line for the throne, the Parliament could totally change the laws of the land, so he isn't." This seems a vacuous claim. They could also get rid of the monarchy. They could also declare the moderators of Skeptics.SE to be Heads of Government. How can this question be answered by evidence?
    – Oddthinking
    Oct 25 '15 at 2:50

Browse other questions tagged .