Yes. Technically. But in reality we are not an absolute secular state. The old orders still remain; they are still functional no matter whether those old orders are limited in power or not. And there exists only a rather thin (or limited depending upon your wording) veneer of the freedom we often associate with secularism. We are given freedom to vote, for example but only when we put pen to paper. Plus much about politics is often spin and trying to grab the "centre-ground"; in order for a party to get the maximum votes. It is dirty! the whole system of politics and the organising of the masses is dirty and the queen doesn't want to get her hands dirty and so she appoints her officials to do the job:(Original post by gingergooner)
A proper democratic state should technically be secular, so I'm still not convinced that couldn't be revamped. You're also trying to convince a second generation Irish Republican to be fair, so perhaps I'm on the wrong thread.
Turn on thread page Beta
The Monarchy: Yey or Nay? watch
- 06-02-2010 02:43
- 06-02-2010 02:50
It is about time that people looked properly at the monarchy and not their public image; how they are portrayed in the media, for example. She rules absolutely by divine right so as long as the Church is established she rules; she is deferential to the papacy. The Church of England; the Anglican Church is just Church for the masses! The Catholic Church is the Grand Master, if you like, of the entire organisation of powers along those lines in this country and in the west.
(Original post by Cesare Borgia)
- 06-02-2010 02:53
I think it is becoming increasingly likely that the crown will be passed straight to William.
I don't think there is any law which demands any particular type of accession, its just tradition, so I assume those would be the two ways it would be done. However, the Accession Council would only not proclaim Charles King if, as I said, the Queen's will suggests William should take over - and that won't happen, she loves tradition and propreity too much (and damn right too!)
(Original post by MaceyThe)
- 06-02-2010 11:00
Erm.... so you want to remove the monarchy for stress-related issues? Why are they causing you to be stressed? Live next door to 'em or something? The korgi's been peeing in your front garden again??
So just because you don't know what the monarchy do (which is a hell of a lot if you look at it,) you want to get rid of them?
As an example, here's a typical day in the life of the Queen.
All the best mate
(Original post by aliluvschoc)
- 06-02-2010 11:10
Keep - I like the tradition.
that said, anyone saying tourism should just hush. the minimal amount of tourism that monarchy adds to the tourism that would be there anyway of buckingham palace etc is hardly a basis on which we should be deciding the countrys political structure
(Original post by Democracy)
- 06-02-2010 11:16
I am a republican principally. BUT I think the monarchy is really the least of our problems...there's far more to be improved in this country...
- PS Reviewer
- 06-02-2010 11:23
Keep, having the monarchy is hardly detrimental to us in any real sense. Similarly, the quality of our democracy is not diluted as, as has been mentioned, the real power of the monarchy is effectively 0.
If it aint broken don't fix it (Y).
(Original post by Fatal_Microbes)
- 06-02-2010 11:29
All boils down to this single point.
Birthrite isn't sufficient.
People cannot and shouldn't live off their parents legaceys, everyone should make their own life.
If you're willing to believe birthrite means anything then you are presumable a christian fundamentalist.
I mean mean we are merely nothing more than a sequence of coding that determines how we think or what we believe.
But take one step back and its damn obvious.
Birthrite means **** all end of story. Only the rich and powerful and those who wish they were someone would possibly claim birthrite means anything. its a joke.
We are here to live up to our previous generation, build on what they have achieved by working for it.
The god damn royals have private education and suck relatively at GCSE/A-level.
There are superior beings who do not have the birthrite but are better physically and mentally.
So if the advisors must be here, let the best advise the best and not waste the best's interlect on morons who rely on them.
Its okay, I've realised by this point you're going to ignore and attempt to counter act anything I say with the birthrite trump card, but at the end of the day, we are all born the same, and we all control our own destainy.
It isn't hard to wipe out the monarch via sucide/assassination, but their not worth the effort.
It all boils down to my dad is better than your dad, now plx suck my **** and get me somewhere in life.
Its been fun in a sense. But its a shame to see that people want to and can live off their parents achievements.
We are all individuals.
The monarchy has no training and is redundant in society, okay they gain money in tourism, becuase the unfoutunate members of over other countries think its a big deal to see some one of bnoble birth big wowies.
At the end of the day, the monarchy is incompetent, untrained and can't achieve anything for themselves.
They are inferior compared to gneral populace and even buying their way through school/uni doesn't even mean they get the best grades. Its a defunct function and within 50 years should be overthrown anyway.
Now Like I said above its pretty damn obvious given a chance your'd sleep with the queen, it would be pretty obvious to state you are clearly from a conservative background and have been brainwashed into beliving nobel birth means everything. But lets face it, there are members of the royal family in recent times/60 or so years that have been mentally instutionalised, you don't hear or know about them because thats bad for their image.
But whatever its getting really old, A fundamentalist christian won't accept the fact the world is obv over 5000 years, so it's pointless arguing with you. Yes i've realised this now.
And while denial will protect you initially, actually have a look at the stats of the royal family, how many have degress, how many actually are worth anything to society and you're see if you take away their money their nothing. But i'll let that eat away at you and your fellow royalists.
And so to conclue this pointless topic.
Royals = Nothing (if you take away their money)
Birthrite isn't worth a damn, wait till harry or william has a child with downs or such like. (yes thats sick, but fking true)
You can say I over rationalise everything. But retarded off spring of 2 doctors isn't a doctor, so the offspiring of a leader isn't a leader. they can go and earn it.
I'd sleep with the Queen, nice one on the ad hominem, that's mature. I'm not from a conservative background, or indeed a priviliged one, my Father voted repeatedly for Labour and my Mother the Liberal Democrats. I haven't been brainwashed, my opinions are formed primarily from reading (Leviathan by Hobbes in particular), and my interpretation of current affairs and history.
You have repeatedly failed to understand what I have said and made it abundantly clear that you are just another one of these cookie cutter anarchist buffoons that can do little else but regurgitate simple ideas quite dogmatically.
- 06-02-2010 11:34
Most of them Neigh but overall a slight Yey.
- 06-02-2010 11:34
Yay, she does nothing but meh. Part of the reason people are attracted towards coming to England are because of places like Buckingham Palace. Plus the monarchy is part of english tradition.
- 06-02-2010 11:36
Keep, as others have said the time, effort, money and political will it would take to establish a Republic in this country would better be spent dealing with real and more important issues. Plus the monarch is an important diplomatic tool, a rock of stability and a link with the past....really what is the point in getting rid? Plus the British Republic doesn't sound right
- 06-02-2010 11:45
God save the Queen
- 06-02-2010 12:25
Ha, someone negged me. I have in no way been convinced by anything on this thread that the queen actually does something that is necessary and merits the vast amount of riches that she inherits. Also, I'd already seen that link on the rep and still wasn't convinced that these jobs couldn't be done by elected officials
- 06-02-2010 14:40
I give up!!!
- 06-02-2010 14:51
Far too much of traditional British culture has been eroded away in the past few decades....its not time to lose yet another British institution...
- 06-02-2010 15:03
I think that it is rather strange to call ourselves a true democracy when we can't even elect our head of state... Why should one person have all that power (and the monarch does have power) just because they were born into a particular family?
And getting rid of the monarchy would not mean demolishing all the castles or anything, tourists would still come. China doesn't have an emperor yet people visit the Forbidden City. Not to mention that Britain is a country, not a museum.
Besides which, the Royal Family is actually German
(Original post by Underwood94)
- 06-02-2010 15:09
Besides which, the Royal Family is actually German
- 06-02-2010 15:19
Having seen the mess politicians make of our country and how they routinely lie and steal, I'm extremely surprised people would be willing to dispose of what is essentially a figurehead with little power, for someone who would lie and steal and cheat our country. The mind boggles. I mean look at France - look at Jacques Chirac, a known fraudster who publicly stole and embezzled and had his son in law murdered, yeah let's replace our little old lady with one of him! Great idea!
Plus, people saying that we have a democracy are ridiculous. We're more communist than China is - we have free healthcare, and equality legislation and equal opportunities subsidies coming out of our fricking ears.
- 06-02-2010 15:26
It's not a major issue. However, I'd rather not have a monarchy, after all, we no longer live in the Middle Ages.
(Original post by Mr Sparkles)
- 06-02-2010 15:26
I'm extremely surprised people would be willing to dispose of what is essentially a figurehead with little power.