Read this again:
Because she cannot constitutionally fill the vacancy caused by the death, resignation, impeachment and removal of any US president under whom she served.
That has nothing to do with gender, and, if read literally, would also disqualify cabinet secretaries.
I find the author's opinion on the whole matter interesting. He may be right or he may be wrong. I'm disappointed in some of my fellow Freepers who have attacked this man so viciously for stating an opinion.
We have a very low tolerance for stupid, sloppy scholarship here.
"Because she cannot constitutionally fill the vacancy caused by the death, resignation, impeachment and removal of any US president under whom she served."
That has nothing to do with gender, and, if read literally, would also disqualify cabinet secretaries.
The author's point has everything to do with gender. Does the US Constitution say that the person holding the office of VP can not be someone ineligble for the Presidency? Yes, it does. Does it say the same of cabinet members? No, it doesn't. A cabinet member, and we have had some, could be under 35 or foreign born. Does that mean they were ineligible to be a cabinet member? No. By your reasoning you could say that a foreign-born person can be President because Henry Kissinger was Secretary of State. Because of what the US Constitution says, Kissinger is not eligible for the Presidency or the VP. Whether he served as a cabinet member has absolutely nothing to do with whether a woman can be President or VP.
What would happen if such a person were in line to be President due to a disaster that wiped out all others ahead of him in the line of succession? I don't know. Perhaps they would be skipped. Just as a woman would be if the author's opinion is correct. Again, his piece has nothing to do with First Ladies or cabinet members.
We have a very low tolerance for stupid, sloppy scholarship here.
I am not a scholar but I still find his assertions worth looking into. First, though, you need to grasp what he is saying, before you can pronounce judgment on it, don't you think?
This leads directly to the (absurd) notion that the current law of presidential succession is un-Constitutional.