Equal marriage bill for England and Wales given Royal Assent and is now law!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/17/britain-gay-marriage-legal_n_3610525.html

LONDON (The Borowitz Report)—Moments after approving a new law legalizing gay marriage in England and Wales, Queen Elizabeth II of Britain unleashed a blistering attack on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for “lacking the guts” to do the same.

The British monarch’s brutal evisceration of Gov. Christie stunned observers, who did not know that she was such a close follower of his gay-marriage stance.

“I don’t like to badmouth people,” she said. “But I’m the head of a monarchy that began in the ninth century, and I’m apparently more modern than Chris Christie.”

After shocking observers with her opening salvo, she continued to tear Gov. Christie to shreds.

“Look, I know he has to appeal to the crazy right wingers in his party,” she added. “But the fact is, he’s not as forward-thinking as an eighty-seven-year-old lady who wears a crown on her head. It’s pathetic.”

Asked if she had advice for Gov. Christie, the British monarch said, bluntly, “Just sign the damn bill, Chris.”

Responding to a reporter’s question about the upcoming royal birth, Elizabeth replied, “Tell you the truth? I’m just glad the kid’s not being born in New Jersey.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/07/queen-elizabeth-rips-chris-christie-on-gay-marriage.html

PS The title of his blog is News un Shuffled. But, hell, it is funny isn't it?

I won't mind having her as my grandmother-in-law.. But all the princes seem to be either taken or dating girls. So I decided to live this life as nice as possible to people.. Who knows, after this life I might be marrying a prince in my dreams.. lol..

She has blown me away. I figured she signed for 'the good of the country' and not for personal feeling. Totally blown away. Rock on Queeny!!

The royal assent is much more a foregone conclusion than a Presidential signature or veto. She would have had to be willing to force a political crisis to refuse, since all the major political parties were in agreement.

The royal assent is much more a foregone conclusion than a Presidential signature or veto. She would have had to be willing to force a political crisis to refuse, since all the major political parties were in agreement.

I didn't think she had veto power. What could have happened if she had refused to sign it?

Passing without comment over the faintly kinky air hovering round the delicious syllables "royal assent," we turn to all-knowing Wikipedia...

The granting of royal assent is the method by which any constitutional monarch formally approves and promulgates an act of his or her nation's parliament, thus making it a law. In the vast majority of contemporary monarchies, this act is considered to be little more than a formality; even in those nations which still permit their ruler to withhold the royal assent (such as the United Kingdom, Norway and Liechtenstein), the monarch almost never does so, save in a dire political emergency (see reserve power), or upon the advice of his or her government. While the power to withhold royal assent was once exercised often in European monarchies, it is exceedingly rare in the modern, democratic political atmosphere that has developed there since the 18th century... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Assent

In a parliamentary or semi-presidential system of government, a reserve power is a power that may be exercised by the head of state without the approval of another branch of the government. Unlike in a presidential system of government, the head of state is generally constrained by the cabinet or the legislature in a parliamentary system, and most reserve powers are usable only in certain exceptional circumstances. The reserve powers of the President of Ireland are called discretionary powers... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_power