Changes

== re Acts ==

== re Acts ==

An editor persists in adding the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Queen_Elizabeth_II&diff=prev&oldid=1368469 paragrapgh] claiming that the queen is a pro-abortion, pro-globalism liberal. This is childish ignorance: the Queen does not decide which Acts to sign or decline - she does not defy the will of Parliament, and thus the will of the people, by refusing to sign ''any'' Act. No monarch has defied Parliament/the people since queen Anne refused to sign an Act which would arm the Scottish militias - just when France was threatening war - in 1708. (The Scots had previously taken up arms against the English and on the side of the French.) [[User:NeilWalker|NeilWalker]] ([[User talk:NeilWalker|talk]]) 16:21, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

An editor persists in adding the [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Queen_Elizabeth_II&diff=prev&oldid=1368469 paragrapgh] claiming that the queen is a pro-abortion, pro-globalism liberal. The Queen does not decide which Acts to sign or decline - she does not defy the will of Parliament, and thus the will of the people, by refusing to sign ''any'' Act. No monarch has defied Parliament/the people since queen Anne refused to sign an Act which would arm the Scottish militias - just when France was threatening war - in 1708. (The Scots had previously taken up arms against the English and on the side of the French.) [[User:NeilWalker|NeilWalker]] ([[User talk:NeilWalker|talk]]) 16:21, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

:But Queen Anne did have the authority to veto the bill -- it seems that Queen Elizabeth's actions have precedent but are not law. If she cared strongly about these issues, she would not have signed those bills. What do you say to that? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:24, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

:But Queen Anne did have the authority to veto the bill -- it seems that Queen Elizabeth's actions have precedent but are not law. If she cared strongly about these issues, she would not have signed those bills. What do you say to that? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:24, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

::The constitutional crisis which would arise from a sitting monarch defying the will of the people would lead to the dissolution of the monarchy. The reigning monarch remains neutral in politics and what they do or do not care strongly about is immaterial. You forget, we have cut kings' heads off in the past for defying the will of Parliament. [[User:NeilWalker|NeilWalker]] ([[User talk:NeilWalker|talk]]) 16:27, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

::The constitutional crisis which would arise from a sitting monarch defying the will of the people would lead to the dissolution of the monarchy. The reigning monarch remains neutral in politics and what they do or do not care strongly about is immaterial. You forget, we have cut kings' heads off in the past for defying the will of Parliament. [[User:NeilWalker|NeilWalker]] ([[User talk:NeilWalker|talk]]) 16:27, 20 August 2017 (EDT)