There is a lot to unpack there. I’ll give it a brief overview. Who seduced Henry VIII? I think this is misunderstanding the dynamic of absolute monarchy here. Henry liked women. This being said we know he only ever had four long term mistresses but seriously, the idea that Anne seduced Henry is not an accurate description of their relationship.

What she did do well however was manipulate him, using her virtue to demand a high price for consummation apparently. An interesting tactic, but given Henry’s relationship with her older sister, one can assume there were complex interpersonal relationships going on there we can barely fathom.

As for ‘right’? No one had any rights- only what you could claim. Henry VIII was after all the son of a usurper; his families claim to the throne was given legitimacy by force, ruthlessness and direct action. It would be next to impossible to see such a dynasty arise without there being a broader impact upon society.

This was why the Tudor era also saw the rise of non-nobles to positions of influence and power. The start of the concept that it wasn’t just the King but the King and his Minister who ran things.

As such the realpolitik of the situation took over- what right did Anne have to demand Henry marry her? None. But she could and she did.

How does she compare? From a Tudor point of view? She gave Henry his most extraordinary child. She only married the one Tudor. Also, she and her family upset a lot on the way up, and ultimately ran head long into the deadly politics that surrounded Henry.

As for the English people? Of course there was some dissent towards the removal of the Queen. There was also some pleasure in it. Catherine was after all, foreign. Anne was English. There was some sympathy. However the opinion of the public doesn’t really matter in an era of totalitarian monarchies.

Any strongly held anti-Boleyn views were kept private as lets face it, people didn’t like to admit to treason (which, technically, dissenting from the policy of the King was).

Sorry- it’s a short answer, large on summery, low on detail, but I figured it was a short hit type of question. If you require more detail on some point please ask and I will try to fill in a bit more.

Did Anne Boleyn feel at all guilty for seducing Henry VIII?

Did she feel bad for not seducing him? This question probably goes beyond the scope of history into a moral or ethical debate and is an age-old question. Definitely, toward the bitter end of The Great Matter she was (like Henry) embittered, and beyond a certain display of remorse, if indeed she did feel guilt. I would wager, she felt guilt for much of her life toward the end of her days as she contemplated her end, and the moves she made to get there. She was human and displayed compassion for her peers and I'm sure as many do on their death beds, she felt remorse before going to meet her maker (dying).

What right did she have to take Catherine's place?

Depends on whom you ask. Anne was revered during Elizabeth's lifetime. Many in England preferred an Englishman/woman over foreigners and many foreign consorts were seen as in house spies, often sending back confidential information to their home countries without anyone batting an eye, or worse, using England as a satellite. After his divorce to Anne of Cleves, Henry never married another foreigner, and the question of marrying a commoner came up again after Mary's unpopular Spanish wedding to Phillip, and again when debating Elizabeth's marriage, and not for the first or last time, raised many debates about the preference for a monarch to wed a subject.

Also, there were two scriptures, one forbidding their marriage, and one condoning it, adding the complexity of another moral, ethical, and biblical side to the issue. Many were legitimately divided on which scripture to follow, and like always when it comes to religious debate, it was also a political drive to lean toward one or the other in this case. Many indeed saw Henry's marriage to Catherine as invalid and beyond the scope for a dispensation, and many mentioned this well before the marriage of Henry and Catherine of Aragon, and obviously, before Anne was in the picture.

I can't move on from this without mentioning the obvious matter of a son. A son, a son, a son. The obvious political issues that arise when the Tudor people still had first-hand accounts of the wars of the roses, and civil war caused by female rule in England. If Anne would have successfully given England a male heir, the number of people claiming her right to replace a barren queen would have gone up.

Last but not least here, many saw the divorce of the Catholic church to be the saving grace of England, and Anne, like it or not, was an instrument that leads them there. So now we are back at my first statement in this section - depends on whom you ask, and eventually would equate to the catholic vs the protestant answer.

This is not to suggest many weren't upset about Catherine's treatment. They just weren't willing to literally stick their necks out like the few who publically defended her and defied Henry during the divorce, before losing their heads.

Ultimately the kings will, and political tides, so the same thing that led Catherine to be the queen of England, I suppose.

Catherine wasn't just a queen consort, she was very functional as a monarch over the English, how could Anne possibly compare?

Not sure what you mean here, and I don't mean to bash COA, but she was merely queen consort to the English king with an impeccable pedigree. Through that pedigree, she was related to the most powerful ruler of their era. Had this not been true, the kings divorce probably would have been much swifter. This is not to take away from her bravery and her honor. I admire her, just to be clear.

The English people seriously just accepted Anne Boleyn?

Catherine was clear in her lifetime and during her exile she did not want anyone to take arms against her husband in her name, because it would be a sin to rebel against her husband in this way. So in theory, if she had people willing to take arms, she never requested it. Rather this would have happened even if she did is debatable. It would have been a rare instance for the people to rebel against their sovereign lord for a queen consort, but as is the case with Catherine the great of Russia, not impossible. In any case, her health was failing rapidly after her fall from grace, so it's arguable how much good it'd have done, other than for Mary's sake or the strength of her claim.