Unto the Board of Directors of the Society for Creative Anachronism, Inc.
Congratulations on your proposal with regard to Same Gender Consorts. You have managed to change the topic of discussion from Same Gender Consorts to how poorly your proposal is written.
I will start by saying that I am militantly ambivalent on the general topic of SGC. Your proposal, however, is so poorly worded and thought out that it best to start over.
I have the following problems with the proposal as worded:
#1 The two sentences are contradictory. The second sentence makes it clear that must does not belong in the first sentence. Is there another case in the governing documents where Crowns are given specific permission to abrogate those same governing documents? You could accomplish much with a rewrite.
#2 If the time has come to make this change, it ought to be universal. To allow it to slowly creep across the Known World would, I fear, cause even greater division and acrimony than the change itself. I see somewhat of an analogy to the Supreme Court case of Brown v Board of Education where the Justices held off announcement of the decision until it was unanimous. For the Board to pass this decision off to the Kingdoms is just short of cowardly, in my opinion.
#3 How does the proposal apply to Principalities? As written, you give the power to decide to the entrance requirement to a Coronet list to the Crown of the Kingdom, rather than the Coronet of the Principality, a violation of the implicit parallelism between Crown/Kingdom and Coronet/Principality.
I know that mine will not be the only letter to reach you on the issue of wording, as opposed to the underlying issue of SGC. I am disappointed that the proposal put forth by the Board is so fundamentally flawed that it redirects the discussion from the actual topic to how poorly written the proposal is.