sandspider Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 no,this one's not for me too many blinkered people,I'll just live with my thoughts on them You've just described yourself there I'm not particularly a supporter of the royals, but I believe they bring more to the country than they cost us. As for the wedding, I won't be watching it but I will happily have the day off, thank you . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitebridges Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 I am royalist and always will be. The sooner HMS Queen Elizabeth is ready to sail the better. HRH Prince Phillip is a fine patron of the BASC and William and Harry are keen game shots. The Royal Family is something to feel proud of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno22rf Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Cant stand the ********-A Gerry and a Greek who drain this country and are so out of touch with reality that it hurts.As for bringing in money-i think we would generate more income kicking them out of their palaces and opening the buildings up for tourism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libs Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Cant stand the ********-A Gerry and a Greek who drain this country and are so out of touch with reality that it hurts.As for bringing in money-i think we would generate more income kicking them out of their palaces and opening the buildings up for tourism. How? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albertan_J Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 As a Canadian I think they are great they generate money everywhere they go like a micro economy. I won't be watching the wedding but I can't knock the royals or their support of country pursuits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) Cant stand the ********-A Gerry and a Greek who drain this country and are so out of touch with reality that it hurts.As for bringing in money-i think we would generate more income kicking them out of their palaces and opening the buildings up for tourism. Absolute cobblers. I think you'll find the Queen has an incredibly in depth knowledge of what's going on in the country, and indeed the world. You'll also find a lot of royal palaces are already opened up for tourism, and tax is paid on the takings. The Duchy of Cornwall also pays tax on it's income, the same as any other business. It costs each of us about 75p a year for civil list payments. Money very well spent in my opinion. I'll be watching the wedding. If there's one thing this country is still good at it's the pomp and pagentary surrounding big royal occasions. Something every other country can only marvel at. Edited April 8, 2011 by poontang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justintime Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 www.thebcgroup.org.uk Visit that web site and see what she is surposed to be doing as sworn under oath when she took the crown and it is still in force Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 The queen is obviously a person committed to their country and works tirlessly to that end. For her the word 'duty' is a lifetimes commitment. The younger royals have not done a great deal to distinguish themselves and hence the rise of the republican ethic. For me the queen is the last of the true monarchs and in her the monarchy has moved from public adulation (dont forget the war) to dissillusion. They do earn more than they cost for the country and given a choice of paying politicians and the queen, i know my preference. Irrespective of your personal view they are an undeniable asset and quite obvously human and open to all those frailties. I suppose for now I am a monarchist, you cant replace it when its gone. That having been said, even though the queen pays tax, she has earned my respect, the rest have yet to. Charles is at least a countryman and questions those who expect respect for e.g. architecture/architects. He (of very few) has stood against some of the **** we would otherwise have had to swallow to permit the extreme professional arrogance of some of these people. That having been said the camilla thing is unhelpful. On balance I wouldn't swap the queen and hope for better things from Charles children. Shortening the list of the family which is even part publicly supported is an inevitability. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 The main problem is if you did not have the royals then you would have to have a Precedent as a state figure head can you imagine Precedent Cameron or Or the Labour bloke I do not think so. I am no lover of the Royals but I would keep the immediate family and take all of the titles of all of the rest of them Ie Sir xxx all that this **** dose is continue the class system a good person works hard all of there life and gets a CBE some posh *** or politician gets a knighthood just for being alive. But whatever happens for god sake get rid of the national anthem GOD SAVE THE QUEEN its 2011 not 1841 what about us the people down't we matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pushkin Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 www.thebcgroup.org.uk Visit that web site and see what she is surposed to be doing as sworn under oath when she took the crown and it is still in force Sorry - but having read the introduction to the above site I have chosen (as is my constitutional right) not to read such drivel. Even in the introduction it smacks immediately of someone who thinks they know it all but are trying again to use the left wing anarchistic approach to destabilising countries. They are insisting that the British people have been hoodwinked regarding tehir constitution - have they never heard of constitutional reform - as enacted by Parliament -the real law of the land? You will need to give me a far greater amount of factual information rather than an Erik Von Danikan double take at what appears to him to be real life. I still think the Monarchy have a great role to play in Britain and on the world stage that benefits us. Pushkin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Duncan Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 For years I've come to see the royals as an unnecessary expense and felt slightly anti-royalist. However, in recent years I've come to appreciate that the Brits are different from the european states and having a monarch is one of those vital differences that set us apart. The other oustanding feature of good ol' GB would be its highest teenage pregnancy level in Europe - woot! Sometimes a tradition is also worth it fo its own sake. Can't believe I just said that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 I don't worship the Royals but do respect them, and feel they are a vital part of the UK, plus the history of the Monarchy is very interesting, for me anyways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds chimp Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 The main problem is if you did not have the royals then you would have to have a Precedent as a state figure head can you imagine Precedent Cameron or Or the Labour bloke I do not think so. I am no lover of the Royals but I would keep the immediate family and take all of the titles of all of the rest of them Ie Sir xxx all that this **** dose is continue the class system a good person works hard all of there life and gets a CBE some posh *** or politician gets a knighthood just for being alive. But whatever happens for god sake get rid of the national anthem GOD SAVE THE QUEEN its 2011 not 1841 what about us the people down't we matter. what would you have then??? jerusalem or swing low sweet chariot?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Duncan Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 what would you have then??? jerusalem or swing low sweet chariot?? Good suggestions both. Or maybe Ice Ice baby ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksdad Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Do you want some Islamic chanting being piped from the rooftops at dawn and dusk every day ? No ? Then stand up for our traditions and our heritage, simple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeds chimp Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Do you want some Islamic chanting being piped from the rooftops at dawn and dusk every day ? No ? Then stand up for our traditions and our heritage, simple you have not lived near Bradford then :yp: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toombsy Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'm enlighted by some of the comments on this thread, as I too have often wondered what they do. But as per most comments made in Forums, I'll take most of it with a pinch of salt. They don't really bother me, and I'm over the moon that we can have a day off - means a day shooting for me or something good. Sure as hell not sitting in front of the telly watching the wedding. The only thing that does get to me about them is the fact that we're stuck with them. We don't have any choice. And that's hardly democratic. Actually it's discrimination, or even monopolisation, when you think about the way they rule over the country. And both of those are illegal. One rule for the incredibly rich.... and another for the working class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsm1968 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 It costs each of us about 75p a year for civil list payments. Money very well spent in my opinion. +1 The royal family is welcome to my 75p. People who believe the royal family do nothing, probably believe the previous government did a good job! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave 101 Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 Not wanting to upset anyone,but,they do,nt do anything for me,just my honest opinion folks They support shooting and other country sports , maybe they do something for you that you dont realise it . Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albertan_J Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 The main problem is if you did not have the royals then you would have to have a Precedent as a state figure head can you imagine Precedent Cameron or Or the Labour bloke I do not think so. I am no lover of the Royals but I would keep the immediate family and take all of the titles of all of the rest of them Ie Sir xxx all that this **** dose is continue the class system a good person works hard all of there life and gets a CBE some posh *** or politician gets a knighthood just for being alive. But whatever happens for god sake get rid of the national anthem GOD SAVE THE QUEEN its 2011 not 1841 what about us the people down't we matter. Predictive text ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katzenjammer Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I'm enlighted by some of the comments on this thread, as I too have often wondered what they do. But as per most comments made in Forums, I'll take most of it with a pinch of salt. They don't really bother me, and I'm over the moon that we can have a day off - means a day shooting for me or something good. Sure as hell not sitting in front of the telly watching the wedding. The only thing that does get to me about them is the fact that we're stuck with them. We don't have any choice. And that's hardly democratic.Actually it's discrimination, or even monopolisation, when you think about the way they rule over the country. And both of those are illegal. One rule for the incredibly rich.... and another for the working class. Putting aside the income generation aspects etc, this is the most valid point in a world increasingly screaming for democracy and wanting to topple dictatorships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
death from below Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 They are an ancient, integral part of our history. Why do you think the Yanks come over here in their millions - it's not to see the Grand union canal or the bullring in Birmingham - it's to view our history, most of it located within walking distance in central London. Many leading states nowadays have little or no history and the only bit they have is as a result of our once great empire (America, Australia, many African states etc). Whether they cost money or not, having a deep sense of heritage is important for me and for that point alone the crazy bunch in Buckingham palace get my vote. Let's face it, if we didn't have them, all we'd have are the politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 what would you have then??? jerusalem or swing low sweet chariot?? To be honest its not so much the tune its the words if they could be changed to something more in line with modern thinking the country is the people who live there not the figure head. Could you imagine Americans singing GOD SAVE OBAMA or the French Sorcose or whatever he is called some how I can not see that happening so why should we sing GOD SAVE THE QUEEN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think Viper & Dr W as well as other have hit the nail on the head. I can't really add anything to this debate except that I, for another, am pro-royal. The Queen does so much for the country. If you've never watched any of the documentaries about her then you're obviously talking from your sphincter. She takes her role as Monarch as one of complete privelige and has to be done to the letter. She never wanes in her duty as Hed of State and when we lose her we will be hard pressed to have a Monarch who can live up to the precident she has set. I think we are extremely lucky to her as our Queen. As for the underlings like Princes Andrew & Edward, even Harry to some degree, I care less about them as they have a priveliged life without any, or certainly as mainy, of the responsibilities as those directly in line for the Throne. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagsy Posted April 9, 2011 Report Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think Viper & Dr W as well as other have hit the nail on the head. I can't really add anything to this debate except that I, for another, am pro-royal. The Queen does so much for the country. If you've never watched any of the documentaries about her then you're obviously talking from your sphincter. She takes her role as Monarch as one of complete privelige and has to be done to the letter. She never wanes in her duty as Hed of State and when we lose her we will be hard pressed to have a Monarch who can live up to the precident she has set. I think we are extremely lucky to her as our Queen. As for the underlings like Princes Andrew & Edward, even Harry to some degree, I care less about them as they have a priveliged life without any, or certainly as mainy, of the responsibilities as those directly in line for the Throne. And to top it all - they all shoot and hunt too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.