Prince Harry has had a long reputation of bringing shame to the British royal family. Known for his drunken nights out partying and fornicating, he has often acted in a way that is most unbecoming for a prince of Wales. He has also been an active participant in evil elitist endeavors such as the war in Afghanistan and the sodomite and transgender agendas.

Through his rebellious nature, he has had some redeeming moments during his younger days when he angered the leftist establishment. Back in 2005, for example, he wore a shirt with a swastika on the shoulder to a party.

Now the “matured” Harry has been fully brought in line with the agenda. His engagement to American actress Meghan Markle breaks nearly every traditionalist taboo that has preserved some semblance of chivalry among the British royal family:

1. While Kate Middleton, the wife of older brother William, has been criticized for not being enough of a feminist, Markle is being hailed as the first true feminist in the British royal family.

2. Markle is not only from a completely unrelated foreign people, but is not even from his own race. This means that the royal bloodline will, from now on, be forever stained with foreign DNA, which will greatly impede the family’s representative duties toward and relationship with the nation with which they have historically and covenantally been endowed.

3. Markle is a divorcée. While I do not think remarriage after divorce is always sinful, it needs to be approached with caution. In this regard the Church of England’s position – that if exes are still alive, remarriage should be granted only in exceptional circumstances – is a commendable one. In Harry’s case, it is good reason not to marry Markle on these grounds alone. Reportedly, it was her career that stood in the way of her previous marriage, which is itself a testimony to the fact that she, as a feminist, wouldn’t put her family first. It also implies that her divorce was based on illegitimate grounds. Rumors are already doing the rounds that because of this, Queen Elizabeth might not attend the wedding at all.

4. Finally, as Markle is a descendant of a freed slave, the marriage is also unwise based on the criteria of social class alone. Class distinctions lie at the very foundation of the institution and maintenance of royalty, which is based on fundamentally anti-egalitarian propositions. By showing his complete disregard for social (in addition to racial) distinctions, Harry’s marriage is an attack on the very institution of the monarchy itself.

I would say that, if the wedding were to take place, it would mark a sad day for the Anglo-Saxon world, but then again, the royal family hasn’t had their people’s best interest at heart for a very long time.