Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Sorry Republicans.



Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,323
Living In a Box
One thing I've noticed in this thread is that the Republicans are reverting to abusive language, where as the royalists (and neutrals) are remaining polite.

That is because they are normally angry Militants, Red Wedge, Derek Hatton type shit.
 




Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
The Head of State also Heads the Commonwealth.

The Government are not taking the piss they are steadying the economy raped by the previous Government who encouraged everyone to spend beyond their means.

There's a great irony in that statement given how much the royal family raped others to take possession of a great deal of their lands.
 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,207
She's not noble, she's from a long like of people who condoned attorcities aplenty while they sat in their ivoriy towers.

The Queen wouldn't allow any of the heirs to the throne to marry a Catholic or they'd have to abdicate, what a bigoted old bitch she is.

She also forced her son into marrying someone he didn't love instead of someone he did, that didn't work out too well for her did it.
 


Bulldog

Well-known member
Sep 25, 2010
749
One thing I've noticed in this thread is that the Republicans are reverting to abusive language, where as the royalists (and neutrals) are remaining polite.

Really, i am biased but it looks the other way around to me
 


Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,323
Living In a Box
at no point did i even hint at that suggestion.

but i there is a system in place to control the government then that system should be doing a better job.

Think you Aussies have an issue with the Commonwealth which is fair enough as I might have a different attitude if the Queen of Australia influenced the UK.

Mind you if it was Kylie - no problem at all.
 








BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,207






beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,019
What does the head of state actually do?
Do we need one at all?
Why do we have to support their extended family for them to do what ever they do?
Why do they need so many massive houses and estates to do it?
If they have the power to throw out governments then why don't they put some pressure on those governments to stop taking the piss out of us?

some sensible questions. i'll have a crack at them.

* The head of state is the public face of the state, with political powers or official duties as the state determines. its a flexible thing for each nation to decide on.
* Yes you need one. a Monarch, a President, or it might be the Prime Minister (if thats the highest office). these are just names for the role, the role is necessary whatever - speak to the nation, meet with other nation heads for state ceromony or political events. we have a split role, with all the political stuff defered to the PM and cabinet.
* no we dont need to support thier extended family. and we dont in the UK, the civil list is a handful of the immediate family now (too much for some still, but its not the vision of dozens of hangers on some have)
* the head of state would have offices and palaces. french do. germans do. americans do. replace Backingham Palace with White house and Windsor with Camp David. most the palaces are part of the crown itself, they are held by the state and past on with the crown. Queen herself owns i think Balmoral and Sandringham, upkeep paid for from her own assets, which are far less than people think. (to get into debate about where her wealth comes from and that goes down a communism v capitalism route, pleanty of others have massive country piles)
* finally, how do we know they dont!
 
Last edited:


8ace

Banned
Jul 21, 2003
23,811
Brighton
She's not noble, she's from a long like of people who condoned attorcities aplenty while they sat in their ivoriy towers.

The Queen wouldn't allow any of the heirs to the throne to marry a Catholic or they'd have to abdicate, what a bigoted old bitch she is.

There's no need to be bitter just because you didn't get the day off to watch the wedding of YOUR future K & Q :)
 






BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,207
Plenty of mothers, from that era, tried to do the same. Life has changed since those days.

But she is still on her throne.

As a system it is probably as good as any other, i agree with you on that. My main argument is that if the royals are truely moving forward and embracing modern thinking. then it is time for the queen to go, because from where i am sitting she does not embrace any of those things.
 








Barrel of Fun

Abort, retry, fail
For all its faults its probably the most multicultural gathering of people under one banner.

Certainly not an exclusive closed shop like the Monarchy.

Exclusive closed shop is a bit far-fetched.

Its not even the queen but the CoE that wont allow a Catholic to marry due to the compromise it puts the monarch in.

William has obviously married a 'commoner', hardly exclusive. Interesting that William had 3 exes who were upper class and he went for Kate - friends first, then lovers, like that
 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,207
some sensible questions. i'll have a crack at them.

* The head of state is the public face of the state, with political powers or official duties as the state determines.
* Yes you need one. a Monarch, a President, or it might be the prime minister. these are just names for the role, the role is necessary whatever - speak to the nation, meet with other nation heads for state ceromony or political events. we have a split role, with all the political stuff defered to the PM and cabinet.
* no we dont need to support thier extended family. and we dont in the UK, the civil list is a handful of the immediate family now (too much for some still, but its not the vision of dozens of hangers on some have)
* the head of state would have offices and palaces. french do. germans do. americans do. replace Backingham Palace with White house and Windsor with Camp David. most the palaces are part of the crown itself, they are held by the state and past on with the crown. Queen herself owns i think Balmoral and Sandringham, upkeep paid for from her own assets, which are far less than people think. (to get into debate about where her wealth comes from and that goes down a communism v capitalism route, pleanty of others have massive country piles)
* finally, how do we know they dont!

Thanks for answering them.

If the queen does the same job as the president then for my money that means we don't need a sepeate head of state, most of those things can be done by our elected leader.
According to Wikipedia the queen and prince phillip have three official estates and four private ones. this is, in this day and age excessive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_royal_residences

If they are putting pressure on government, they are not putting on sufficent pressure.
 


Tyrone Biggums

Well-known member
Jun 25, 2006
13,498
Geelong, Australia
There's no need to be bitter just because you didn't get the day off to watch the wedding of YOUR future K & Q :)

I'm not bitter.

I'm bemused at grown men getting all joyed up over a couple of rich kids and saying how wonderful they are.

They must have no sense of self pride.
 




BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
18,207
Was up convict boy? Upset you lost the ashes, and hating the English for it?

Well maybe the royals are moving forward with their thinking but that doesn't mean everyone is, eh?
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
36,019
The Queen wouldn't allow any of the heirs to the throne to marry a Catholic or they'd have to abdicate, what a bigoted old bitch she is.

the Act of Settlement determines this. its the decision of parliament, not the monarch.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here