Swear allegiance to who ?!

[Jay_Benson]

Originally Posted by Scubee

When was that then?

Just before his funeral.

[big_si]

Originally Posted by Scubee

When was that then?

20th Sept 2004 apparently

[gerbil]

I agree its an attempt to foster pride, in such an idiotic way but its an attempt.

Queenie maybe symbolic of this country, and trust me i like this country and get p*ssed off with people running it down, but that doesn't a) make it right that the head of state is a family hand me down and b) mean its the only way of doing it. There are many many many countries around the world that cope without a royal family.

I don't think the present incumbent is a tyrant. I do think that the evolution of this country (including the history of royalty) has produced a trend in favour of liberty without violence. I do think that the hereditary principle of government is so 18th century that we really should retire the lot when the present one gives up. I'll even contribute to a gold watch if you like.

[royplumber]

The papers were all against the royals calling to scrap the lot. The papers were saying that britain wants rid ov them this went on for months because I was reading it in the newspapers. I think it was the Queens golden jubilee and I expected it to be a flop but the streets were crowded to overflowing with people. And anyway Prince Charles give me £5,000 pounds a lot of people don't see what good they do because they don’t boast about it.

[Crieagle]

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

I think that most of you are missing the point - the Queen is the head of state and as such is symbolic - this is an effort to get the people of this beautiful and sceptered isle to show some pride.

After the idiotic selfishness promoted by Thatcher ripped the heart out of most communities it is going to take some work to restore that heart and inject some social conscience.

To those that would have a republic I would simply say that whilst you may not like the monarchy because it has faults, and I think it does, before you tear it down what are you going to replace it with? Do you really want a head of state that is elected? An elected person is someone who says "Me Me Me Me" better than anyone else - hardly a great qualification.

What I want from someone as the head of state is someone that is somewhat distant from the filthy grubbing politicians that we have in power currently (and their predecessors). I cannot think of anyone better than the Queen now that Brian Clough has died.

Your honorary membership for the tooting popular front has been revoked.

Sorry brother.

[gerbil]

I don't doubt they do a lot of good work i just don't want them as part of the government. I know many good people who do a lot of good nothing to do with royalty.

[Jay_Benson]

Originally Posted by Crieagle

Your honorary membership for the tooting popular front has been revoked.

Sorry brother.

Hah - "honorary" membership. That is just soooooo establishment.

[Paulus]

Originally Posted by gerbil

I agree its an attempt to foster pride, in such an idiotic way but its an attempt.

Queenie maybe symbolic of this country, and trust me i like this country and get p*ssed off with people running it down, but that doesn't a) make it right that the head of state is a family hand me down and b) mean its the only way of doing it. There are many many many countries around the world that cope without a royal family.

That is very well put. But we dont really get to choose our ploiticians as it is. They are foisted on the electorate after being suitably doctored. So we would never actually have a free choice for a presidential style head of state. The job would be handed down to some soiled political crony as we are seeing with Phony Blurr and his up and coming post as the first constitutional president of the European Super State of Corruption.

I don't think the present incumbent is a tyrant. I do think that the evolution of this country (including the history of royalty) has produced a trend in favour of liberty without violence. I do think that the hereditary principle of government is so 18th century that we really should retire the lot when the present one gives up. I'll even contribute to a gold watch if you like.

I'm not a rampant monarchist. Like many, I think there have been too many hangers on. But seen from another angle, Lizzie has watched governments, strong and weak alike, come and go. She knows more about our constitution than anyother individual in the public eye. I am cetain that she could inject some common sense into the"Britishness" debate if she wasn't mortally affraid of opening her mouth.

Paul

[Jay_Benson]

Originally Posted by gerbil

I don't doubt they do a lot of good work i just don't want them as part of the government. I know many good people who do a lot of good nothing to do with royalty.

They have little to do with government. Their being royalty does not make their efforts any less though.

There are many people that have benefited from the monarchy around the country from such bodies as the Princes' Trust and the Duke of Edinburgh scheme. The Princes Trust has started many local businesses off and the DofE scheme has let huge numbers of people do things that they would never have dreamed of otherwise and has challenged them both physically and mentally whilst putting back into the community. Both of these bodies have been initiated at the behest of members of the Queen's family.

[Paulus]

Originally Posted by Jay_Benson

There are many people that have benefited from the monarchy around the country from such bodies as the Princes' Trust.

That reminds me, I've just been asked to be a voluntary mentor for the Princes' Trust. So I'll have to get some nice bread in to make Charlie some nice butties to have with his brew when he pops round to do the paper work.

Maybe a "Sir Paul" in the offing. I'll have to watch me bonce though 'cause some freedom fighter with a dragon tatooed on his arse will be trying to chop it off.

Paul