What? I mentioned at a reason for maintaining the monarchy and refusing to coutenance ideologically motivated reform. You haven't explained why you dispute our "anachronisitic justifications" beyond a vague appeal to human rights. Rights are relationsips between people; it's about as clear as any fact of constitutiona; law that nobody has the right to become head of state unless they are born into the correct family. It's not democratic, but it does not undermine democracy; it's not meritocratic, but the hereditary principle imbues its benficiaries with a sense of duty that often creates merit surpassing any to be found through an ostensibly-meritocratic system. You want to talk about moral law? If perfect equality of oppurtunity is such a law, why is it that we have only discovered it over the last few decades? How much of a historical Whig do you want to be?
(Original post by Birchington)
You are right to mention 'organic development' as a reason for scrapping the monarchy. Why should the only criteria for the eligibility of our head of state be their birthright? I would like to see every Briton have the chance to aspire to one day be head of state instead of the current inferior, undemocratic arrangement where you have to be born to a particular family and only that determines your position.
Why should every British man, woman and child be denied the dream of one day being able to be given the honour of serving as head of state? I dispute the anachronistic justifications that monarchists give for supporting the monarchy's retention.
Last edited by JacobW; 14-05-2012 at 19:49.
I am indeed (Conservative), but I don't think much of the leadership. Then again, I don't think much of anyone more liberal than Edmund Burke so that's not saying much!
(Original post by Moleman1996)
Just out of interest, are you in an MHoC party yet, because if you're not you should definately join up
Last edited by JacobW; 14-05-2012 at 20:21.