Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    How do you feel about the royals sympathizing with the Saudi regime that wants to flog a man for expressing his political views on a blog? How does that fit in with the avatar you are currently wearing?

    Also from the greens...

    "

    1. Peers and members of the royal family shall have the same civil rights and fiscal obligations as other citizens.
    2. A settlement of property held by the current royal family shall be made, to divide it between that required for the private life of current members of the family and that to be public property. "

    What you posted in the OP is completly out of context.

    This isn't the french revolution. They are not going to get their heads chopped off. It's not even that radical when countries like France, america etc do not have monarchies.
    It's interesting how the bear never replies to any posts where his views are questioned, and never even attempts engaging in debate.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the bear)
    i have just read an appalling press release by the Green Party in which they promise to put Her Majesty the Queen in a council house.

    i had to check to see if i had picked up Viz instead of The Times.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/p...cle4333034.ece
    you are appalled that queen would be the same as everyone else? the monarchy shouldnt of even lasted this long its a blood line full of interbreeding and butchers.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Good. The Queen and her family can finally go fend for themselves. Ironic seeing that the majority of people that like the monarchy probably look down on poorer people that are on benefits as being 'spongers'. Lol.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by EthanNCL)
    you are appalled that queen would be the same as everyone else? the monarchy shouldnt of even lasted this long its a blood line full of interbreeding and butchers.
    Except she wouldn't be the same as everybody , or at least not as things are, maybe after a term of the greens when everybody is broke, dead or fled

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I was of thinking I might be voting Greens in this years General Election but any chance of that happening is gone. I'm also not sure how reliable they would be in making the UK as green as possible.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EthanNCL)
    you are appalled that queen would be the same as everyone else? the monarchy shouldnt of even lasted this long its a blood line full of interbreeding and butchers.
    I hope you do not use coins and banknotes... that would be very hypocritical of you.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Good. I bet she will fit in relatively well there with her mannerisms. Just kidding. Although, I am surprised by the silly British hereditary principle fad.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kumon)
    I am so happy they said this. At least they stand up for what they believe in.

    Plopping out of the right vagina shouldn't mean you should get my hard earned money to spend on royal holidays, at the same time people are struggling on food banks.

    How any of you can justify people being born into privilege is disgraceful.
    So much for your hypocrisy about "equality".

    Glad the greens said this. They are a real alternative who actually give a toss about the 99%.
    I want to rep you more than once.

    Anyone who is truly liberal IMHO should be against the monarchy. #controversialstatementoftheday
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anunoriginaluser)
    I want to rep you more than once.

    Anyone who is truly liberal IMHO should be against the monarchy. #controversialstatementoftheday
    It's not even controversial, people are just silly double standards.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It's an extreme way of putting it, and despite the greens saying a lot I don't agree with, I can 100% get behind abolishing the monarch as to me the monarchy are 2 things. A symbol and a source of finance.

    They are a symbol of everything we're trying to get away from. They represent a lack of democracy by giving things to those with birth-right. They represent the class system which needs balancing and done away with. Basically, they symbolise archaic views that have no place in the modern world.

    They are a source of finance. It's constantly said they bring in more money than they spend. This, combined with my point on their use as a symbol makes the monarchy the equivalent to moral prostitution. "Yeah, it's dirty, it's wrong and it's not how we should be doing things, but mo' money mo' money!". In my eyes it's no different to a person with a decent job whoring themselves out against everything they believe in, for the sake of the extra income.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In a way the queen lives in a council house, tax funded and that, royal fam has been slying the dole all this time probs claiming dodgy backs
    y backs
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by EthanNCL)
    In a way the queen lives in a council house, tax funded and that, royal fam has been slying the dole all this time probs claiming dodgy backs
    y backs
    You mean living in the highest rate of income tax in the country, on GH order of 85pc?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I wasnt going to be voting for the greens anyway. Most people only vote for them because of green issues (Labour and libdems have initiated of green proposals).


    I wont be voting for them for a number of reasons:

    A zero growth economy, setting up tarriffs (in europe too!)

    Wanting to scrap our armed forces and let Putin do what he wants: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10066374.html

    Having a wish list manifesto; most recently shown in the interview(apparently homes cost £30000) and also there bizzarre version of universal credit (where it was worked out that the poorest would be severely hit)

    Their policies on the monarchy are one of their few reasonable ones, other than that the party is a joke.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    watermelons
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by trad1998)
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...r-Britain.html

    Looking at some of these policies it is incredible they've had support! Some are so radical that even the Bolsheviks may have questioned them!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    To be fair to the Bolsheviks, they were willing to fight for their views. The Greens, on the other hand, support the right of Britons to join Al Qaida and ISIS and believe unconditional surrender to anyone who demands it is the most honourable political act.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chlorophile)
    Honestly, whilst I'm not against that policy, I don't think it's a good idea for the Green Party to have it. Whilst all of the left-wing policies of the Party are great, the absolute most important thing is their environmental policy. That's why I'm supporting them - the left-wing stuff is a nice bonus but the crux of their importance is the environment. They need all of the support that they can get, so as much as I'd love not to care about idiots who get alienated because of the anti-monarchy policies, we unfortunately need those idiot's support and I'd rather compromise with something like the monarchy than something genuinely important.
    They're so naive though.

    They wanted to 'negotiate' with IS. Sure, you go and 'negotiate' with them while I just go and stand over there...

    They also wanted to cut the armed forces, defence, are against militarisation of the EU and get want to get rid of our nuclear deterrent. With the way Rus is playing up recently and with IS looming, you have to ask, are they completely mental?

    The answer is "yes" because they want to negotiate and want peace with people who burn people alive. They're not astute enough to realise that some people don't want peace, don't want to be 'friends', don't want to negotiate and will blow you up if you let them.

    You know what i'm like with climate change and the environment and i'd love to vote for them because of their green policies but they really need to take their rose tinted glasses off. Their recent media disasters only furthers the image that they don't have any idea what they're actually doing, either.

    I sometimes wonder if they have any first hand experiance of what is needed to defend a country. Part of me also feels that the people who are voting for them are young and niave, either that or they haven't read their full manefesto.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Actually what the Greens said on the ISIS thing is that people should not be prosecuted just for holding views, for being members of something or for supporting something on a facebook page. That's been completely misrepresented by the Daily Mail and picked up on blogs, etc. She was saying people should be prosecuted for what they do, not what they think.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ime-say-greens

    There are 65 international terrorist organisations and 14 Irish ones proscribed under UK terrorist legislation.Belonging to those organisations, which include Islamic State, al-Qaida and the IRA, or even just showing support for them by wearing uniform or carrying flags is a criminal offence.
    Bennett said she thought this was wrong. “What we want to do is make sure we are not punishing people for what they think or what they believe,”
    I agree that membership of ISIS is so outrageous that it should be a crime in itself, but I can see her point. The problem is that the government is increasingly moving towards wanting to prosecute people for what they say and think, rather than what they do. Obviously there are limits to free speech, but in the long run it doesn't help our cause by abandoning democracy and human rights and becoming like ISIS ourselves.

    Whilst it seems clear right now that there can be no negotiation with ISIS, I wonder in reality how long that will be the case. There have been many negotiations with the Taliban in Afghanistan and it used to be said that we would never negotiate with them. I can imagine, for example, if ISIS handed over to justice the worst murderers from their ranks and abandoned some of their harsher policies, then neighbouring powers might negotiate with them, depending on how strong they were. There is no serious sign as yet that they can be defeated militarily. Perhaps they will be, but the west appears to remain unwilling to put troops on the ground and the countries that could resolve it, like Turkey, are also not prepared to.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Actually what the Greens said on the ISIS thing is that people should not be prosecuted just for holding views, for being members of something or for supporting something on a facebook page. That's been completely misrepresented by the Daily Mail and picked up on blogs, etc. She was saying people should be prosecuted for what they do, not what they think.
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ime-say-greens


    I agree that membership of ISIS is so outrageous that it should be a crime in itself, but I can see her point. The problem is that the government is increasingly moving towards wanting to prosecute people for what they say and think, rather than what they do. Obviously there are limits to free speech, but in the long run it doesn't help our cause by abandoning democracy and human rights and becoming like ISIS ourselves.

    Whilst it seems clear right now that there can be no negotiation with ISIS, I wonder in reality how long that will be the case. There have been many negotiations with the Taliban in Afghanistan and it used to be said that we would never negotiate with them. I can imagine, for example, if ISIS handed over to justice the worst murderers from their ranks and abandoned some of their harsher policies, then neighbouring powers might negotiate with them, depending on how strong they were. There is no serious sign as yet that they can be defeated militarily. Perhaps they will be, but the west appears to remain unwilling to put troops on the ground and the countries that could resolve it, like Turkey, are also not prepared to.
    Its not really what they think, or their views thats the problem.

    Its the likihood they will commit an attack.

    Peopel who have views crazy or not are fine, but when they self proclaim war its not really ok to let them wander free in shopping centres.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    I wasnt going to be voting for the greens anyway. Most people only vote for them because of green issues (Labour and libdems have initiated of green proposals).


    I wont be voting for them for a number of reasons:

    A zero growth economy, setting up tarriffs (in europe too!)

    Wanting to scrap our armed forces and let Putin do what he wants: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-10066374.html

    Having a wish list manifesto; most recently shown in the interview(apparently homes cost £30000) and also there bizzarre version of universal credit (where it was worked out that the poorest would be severely hit)

    Their policies on the monarchy are one of their few reasonable ones, other than that the party is a joke.
    Newsnight on Tuesday explained the homes cost.

    If UC doesn't hit the poorest, how does it make a financial saving?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Its not really what they think, or their views thats the problem.

    Its the likihood they will commit an attack.

    Peopel who have views crazy or not are fine, but when they self proclaim war its not really ok to let them wander free in shopping centres.
    Yes and presumably this is another sign of naivety on the part of Natalie Bennett, in that it isn't an easy topic to pick to speak out on. That said, the mania for chasing after would-be Jihadis is reaching ridiculous proportions - that snippet she said was right after the Home Office report suggesting preschool children need vetting by kindergarten teachers for Jihadist tendencies.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dill...b_6414000.html

    I mean, maybe it is true that toddlers will give away the fact that their parents are planning to plant bombs or run amok in shopping centres with machetes. However, trying to achieve this level of oppressive monitoring is also quite likely to push people into hating this country, what they see as a hostile Christian culture and leave people more easily targetable by extremists.

    It's a question of what the best strategies are for dealing with hate mongers.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.