So we have another heir to the throne, although I'll never see his coronation given I doubt he'll be south of 70 before he accedes to the throne, thus I'll have to be older than 120 probably to see this event.
Now - you know they changed the law so if the baby had been a she they would still have remained 3rd in line to the throne even if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had a subsequent male child? Well they did; however this was not retrospectively applied. This means Princess Anne, whilst being the Queen's second child, is actually lower in line to the throne than Andrew and Edward, her younger male siblings, and all of their offspring. I think this is a travesty for woman's rights and should be corrected forthwith!!! Actually the main reason I have this interest is that it would elevate Zara Philips (Princess Anne's daughter) from a lowly 15th in line to I think 9th.
Why is that important? Simple. Zara is married to Gloucester rugby star and former England Captain Mike Tindall (the man with a nose that can smell around corners) and I can't help having silly desire to see him as HRH The Prince Consort to HRH Queen Zara. Can you imagine Mike greeting various heads of states or going on tours to the Commonwealth? Having to dress up in all the regalia etc? Come on I bet it's just brought a smile to your face.
The new baby therefore adds complication to my master plan which is clearly to see all those preceding Zara in the line of accession meeting an untimely and sticky end so that my devilishly funny plan to see Mike alongside Zara in full regalia at the State Opening of Parliament can be fulfilled. Brrrrhahahaaha (That's meant to be a demonic maniacal laugh btw.). So if I can get the female accession act amended to be retrospectively applied I reduce my task by 6 and spare both Andrew, Edward and their offspring meeting suspicious ends.
BBC Royal Family Tree showing accession and titles etc. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23272491