Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's nothing, the following quotes are from Charles, son of Philip and Elizabeth, who may be king some day.
Charles to Camilla, in an intercepted telephone call: "I want to feel my way along you, all over you and up and down you and in and out. Oh God, I'll just live inside your trousers or something -- it would be much easier."
Charles: "Or, God forbid, a Tampax (tampon). Just my luck!"
Camilla: "You are a complete idiot! Oh, what a wonderful idea."
What kinda man tells his woman he wants to be her tampon?
Royal or not, what one man says to his wife is quite frankly a private matter, I wonder Miss Ann, if I could come and record some conversations from you and your partners kinky phone calls and post them on here for other CD users to read????
Our queen brings more money into the country each year through tourism than what she costs us so really I can put up with her! Also, I'm sure I read somewhere that the queen makes so many official visits per year that it averages about 2 per day for the entire year...not bad! I do wish her Christmas day speech wasn't pre-recorded though!!
Our queen brings more money into the country each year through tourism than what she costs us so really I can put up with her! Also, I'm sure I read somewhere that the queen makes so many official visits per year that it averages about 2 per day for the entire year...not bad! I do wish her Christmas day speech wasn't pre-recorded though!!
Please prove that the queen brings in more than the millions she costs the taxpayer.
Also, even if she does, which she doesn't, how can you justify a family living in hereditery wealth even on moral or ethical grounds? Isn't this just a question of democracy?
Support for the royal family is born from a shortcut to thinking, and/or false patriotism.. end of.
Please prove that the queen brings in more than the millions she costs the taxpayer.
Also, even if she does, which she doesn't, how can you justify a family living in hereditery wealth even on moral or ethical grounds? Isn't this just a question of democracy?
Support for the royal family is born from a shortcut to thinking, and/or false patriotism.. end of.
Would tourists stop visiting the UK if the UK became a republic (obviously, it wouldn't be called the "UK" anymore)? Personally, I don't think it'd make a blind bit of difference, but if popular support is behind the Monarchy, then there's no real reason to get rid of it (although I'm against it, myself).
Would tourists stop visiting the UK if the UK became a republic (obviously, it wouldn't be called the "UK" anymore)? Personally, I don't think it'd make a blind bit of difference, but if popular support is behind the Monarchy, then there's no real reason to get rid of it (although I'm against it, myself).
I agree, I don't think people would stop visiting the UK at all. It's just an excuse by the Royal supporters to justify not getting rid of them. If we must have a Royal family, make it more streamlined and modern like some of the Scandinavian ones. King or Queen, the rest of the family have to make their own income. Far too much money is spent on their lavish lifestyle which is well out of touch with the rest of us. In these current times when people are losing their homes, struggling to make ends meet the amount of money (including taxpayers money) spent by the Royals is obscene.
Tourists visit other parts of the UK which have no obvious connection to the current Royal family. Not all want to go and visit Buckingham Palace. There are tourist attractions in the UK outwith London.
Please prove that the queen brings in more than the millions she costs the taxpayer.
Also, even if she does, which she doesn't, how can you justify a family living in hereditery wealth even on moral or ethical grounds? Isn't this just a question of democracy?
Support for the royal family is born from a shortcut to thinking, and/or false patriotism.. end of.
A republic would cost the same (if not more) to the taxpayer as having a monarchy. If we were to lose the royal family, we would need to elect a head of state. Most presidents around the world are, yes elected, but are nothing more than figure heads. What a president often doesn't provide is someone to look to with affection which our queen does.
The queen provides us with more stability in politics. There is never any danger of us not having a governmental head as she can call for elections and for parliament to be dissolved (something that I'm glad of in the current climate).
She has many fans and loyal followers throughout the world and yet the royal family costs each tax payer about 62 pence a year. Whenever there is a royal wedding, coronation or funeral it attracts visitors from around the world (not to mention the sheer amount of Chinese and Japanese tourists who come just to take pictures of the castles and houses each year).
She provides a focus for national identity and unity - I have read peoples complaints on this forum regarding the loss of British culture and identity. One thread with particluar focus on Muslims wanting to come over to our country and change things. Is it any wonder if they hear us moaning about our heritage and the way things are.
The queen is in her 80s and still works very hard - something I don't plan to be doing when I'm her age.
A republic would cost the same (if not more) to the taxpayer as having a monarchy. 1.If we were to lose the royal family, we would need to elect a head of state. Most presidents around the world are, yes elected, but are nothing more than figure heads. What a president often doesn't provide is someone to look to with affection which our queen does.
2.The queen provides us with more stability in politics. There is never any danger of us not having a governmental head as she can call for elections and for parliament to be dissolved (something that I'm glad of in the current climate).
She has many fans and loyal followers throughout the world and yet the royal family 3.costs each tax payer about 62 pence a year. Whenever there is a royal wedding, coronation or funeral it attracts visitors from around the world (not to mention the sheer amount of Chinese and Japanese tourists who come just to take pictures of the castles and houses each year).
4.She provides a focus for national identity and unity - I have read peoples complaints on this forum regarding the loss of British culture and identity. One thread with particluar focus on Muslims wanting to come over to our country and change things. Is it any wonder if they hear us moaning about our heritage and the way things are.
5.The queen is in her 80s and still works very hard - something I don't plan to be doing when I'm her age.
1. Surely our Prime Minister would be head of state?
2. When has the Queen last called for an election? If the Queen is so powerful in political matters, why is our country in the state it's in at the moment?
3. I'd rather choose how to spend my own 62p a year thank you, rather than give it to a family that have more money than they know what to do with already, mainly given to them by us!
4. I doubt getting rid of the Royals would have the Taliban squatting at Buckingham Palace.
5. The Queen works very hard? With all these servants looking after her, first class travel, 10 course banquets. Must be absolute torture. What about all the working class people that are being forced to work longer and longer into retirement age in professions alot harder than the Queen has to? Pensioners that can no longer afford to heat their homes or eat properly. I feel sorry for them more.
The Monarchy is outdated and desparately needs to have a very large overhaul. If having a Republic doesn't cost any more, then maybe we should go down that route. It would be fairer on the public that have to go out and do real jobs to pay their way. There are far too many Royal hangers on, sponging off the state.
Having them purely for tourism is no longer an excuse.
1. Surely our Prime Minister would be head of state?
2. When has the Queen last called for an election? If the Queen is so powerful in political matters, why is our country in the state it's in at the moment?
3. I'd rather choose how to spend my own 62p a year thank you, rather than give it to a family that have more money than they know what to do with already, mainly given to them by us!
4. I doubt getting rid of the Royals would have the Taliban squatting at Buckingham Palace.
5. The Queen works very hard? With all these servants looking after her, first class travel, 10 course banquets. Must be absolute torture. What about all the working class people that are being forced to work longer and longer into retirement age in professions alot harder than the Queen has to? Pensioners that can no longer afford to heat their homes or eat properly. I feel sorry for them more.
The Monarchy is outdated and desparately needs to have a very large overhaul. If having a Republic doesn't cost any more, then maybe we should go down that route. It would be fairer on the public that have to go out and do real jobs to pay their way. There are far too many Royal hangers on, sponging off the state.
Having them purely for tourism is no longer an excuse.
My own opinion of the Monarch is that it's an outdated, ineffective institution which represents class division and pompousness. Tartanlad - you are right too about the 62p a year. Imagine if that money were funneled into education, or even into cutting taxes for ordinary people at a time when the global economy is in serious trouble.
I don't think I'd have minded a "streamlined" Monarchy quite as much, i.e. with just the King/Queen and his/her immediate family, just like Denmark or the Netherlands.
I also believe that as a major player in world politics, the UK would be better off with an elected head of state, to represent a more modern, progressive Great Britain. An elected head of state would do the job of the Prime Minster now, i.e. represent Britain on the global / European stage, as opposed to the Prime Minister, who should simply serve as the head of his/her political party.
I never liked the fact that I could only elect the party, i.e. Labour, Conservative or Liberal Democrat, but I had no say in the party leader / future Prime Minister. What if, as is the case with Labour right now, I didn't like Gordon Brown, but I wanted to vote for the Labour Party?
These are just my own opinions though and I'm probably in a minority of British people who'd like to see a republic in their lifetime. As we're clearly in the minority, it may not happen, as long as the majority of people want to keep the Monarchy and not consider the alternative.
I would also like to see a fully elected 2nd chamber to completely replace the House of Lords....another "antique" in itself.
....and don't worry, tourists would still come to London and if anything, Buckingham Palace & other crown estates could be opened up to the public, or Buckingham Palace could serve as the residence of the President and his/her staff.
1. Surely our Prime Minister would be head of state?
2. When has the Queen last called for an election? If the Queen is so powerful in political matters, why is our country in the state it's in at the moment?
3. I'd rather choose how to spend my own 62p a year thank you, rather than give it to a family that have more money than they know what to do with already, mainly given to them by us!
4. I doubt getting rid of the Royals would have the Taliban squatting at Buckingham Palace.
5. The Queen works very hard? With all these servants looking after her, first class travel, 10 course banquets. Must be absolute torture. What about all the working class people that are being forced to work longer and longer into retirement age in professions alot harder than the Queen has to? Pensioners that can no longer afford to heat their homes or eat properly. I feel sorry for them more.
The Monarchy is outdated and desparately needs to have a very large overhaul. If having a Republic doesn't cost any more, then maybe we should go down that route. It would be fairer on the public that have to go out and do real jobs to pay their way. There are far too many Royal hangers on, sponging off the state.
Having them purely for tourism is no longer an excuse.
1. No...oh and I can see Gordan Brown as head of state going down like a lead balloon! Imagine what would happen when Labour decide to by-pass an election then. If Gordan Brown became our head of state it would be the same as the queen as in he hasn't been elected by us and people would moan about that too.
2. Having a queen or not having a queen is not going to solve all of our problems either. I don't think it's fair to say 'if she's so powerful in politics why is our country in the state it's in' - I pointed out she has important rights - I didn't say she is solely responsible for our political affairs! I am glad the queen has never felt the need to dissolve parliament and to be honest it is only when a country is in a desperate state that people would seriously look for something like this to be done. History has proven that this is the most vulnerable time for extremists to infiltrate politics (e.g. Hitler) and all I am saying is that having the queen makes this less likely and provides more stability. I'm happy it's never come to this though. If she exercised this right willy nilly (everytime our confidence dips in the government) there'd be no point in her having them.
3. I can appreciate this and wouldn't we all like to decide exactly what happens to our taxes but what I was trying to point out is that it's not that much per person. You all seem to be making her out to be this horrible person who is laughing at the poor and us that go out to do 'proper jobs' but lets face it she's no Mugabe is she?!!!
4. This argument can be turned either way and it really does make me laugh that you make such light of us getting rid of our monarch. The point is beggers can't be choosers! We all want to keep 'British identity' alive yet we are so quick to mock the things that make us so identifiable. If you go to Thailand for example the people literally love their King, and in Dubai they love their Sheikhs. My point is that they like the way their country is and wouldn't hear of getting rid of their leaders/ royal family etc and it would be inappropriate to suggest this to them. In the UK it is much easier for other cutures to impose their beliefs onto us as we are so quick to criticise ourselves. You may laugh but it is people like you that make this an unfortunate reality. Without a strong sense of identity and unity it is much easier to penetrate a country and the way it operates.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
