ALTHOUGH I do not agree with Ian W Thomson's republican view (Letters, December 6) I defend his right to voice it.
However he seems to wish to ignore the fact that in referring to the "privilege, indulgence, and preferential treatment" into which the child of the Duchess of Cambridge will arrive, these are all relative terms. Some people living in the more deprived areas of Scotland would undoubtedly note that both he and I are privileged to live in very desirable areas of the country and we were able to exercise our own personal preferences and decisions in this indulgence.
The fact is that any baby born into royalty is trammelled on a course of public duty and lack of individual choice and free will which would make ordinary people run a mile.
The stress of carrying such awesome role responsibility killed George VI at the age of 56. That the present Queen has displayed such an extraordinary model of how to be a head of state is surely proof that the system of succession can work magnificently. It is simply by a chance of birth but that, clearly, is the whole point.
The recent Presidential race in the US cost an estimated equivalent of £1.6 billion.With that alternative scenario how could we deny Kate's baby a silver spoon?
We know that the system can have cracks like any family and I concede that the Queen's uncle Edward VIII rather let the side down.
Had he been a president rather than a king I expect no-one would have bothered whom he married as I am certain we would have different expectations in a republic where a British president would likely manoeuvre their way into office, by any means, through the ignoble mire of politics.
Bill Brown,
46 Breadie Drive,
Milngavie.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article