Eh, I'm not too angry, just when people come across as complete jerks and are not open to anyone Else's opinion but there own. I don't mind people being gay, I surely don't support it though, but its there choice. I don't mind having a nice discussion over something like this but when someone says something like "No, I think I'll wait until you make a 3rd post saying you're too stupid to understand," it really pisses me off.
Eh, I'm not too angry, just when people come across as complete jerks and are not open to anyone Else's opinion but there own. I don't mind people being gay, I surely don't support it though, but its there choice. I don't mind having a nice discussion over something like this but when someone says something like "No, I think I'll wait until you make a 3rd post saying you're too stupid to understand," it really pisses me off.
Which is why my post was worded as an "in general", and not directed fully at you =P
So how about you give some arguments, hmmm? Your first post contained them, but (as you addmited) it was a mistake. You called me an idiot in the next two posts, that doesn't count as arguments.
Please anyone, do explain to me how it isn't a disgrace for a democratic country to still maintain a King, Queen and and a whole royal family? Don't tell me what their "powers" are, tell me why they should have them.
Also, just to clear things up: I do not burn gays. Although I am an atheist, so I eat infants on occasion, but who doesn't have small quirks, right?
Sorry missed the whole thing.. i thought it funny though cause even blimmin' scottish people eat that shit up :)
Charlie cooking... he stole every bid he's doing in the video... and it comes out real nice too <3
About no monarchy...
boy,
am i going to have to be the one to pretend i don't agree with Tolkfan about the "hurt" one MUST feel about monarchy (in general)
and
explain that it is, as it always is, just a question of money...
Being a "royal", it's a media survivor bid.. as in they help sell bacon, oil, underwear (you name it) ; plenty of "nobles" in europe are great at it... they actually make societal advancement, being useful ..
as angry captain igloo mentioned, they don't have to "play", they can't be fired, disconnected or "ignored" for faring poorly, but they are there...
And for ENGLAND (which adults call the United Kingdom (it hosts loads of non english people, remember ;) )
The tudors had it gran.. the windsor are next to useless.. the last good one was during the war/depression...
Mr hugebig ears further ruined most of their credit by "carmelia ing" dianna ... his ma had to bitchslap him something fierce
(boy do people need their soaps). :)
Royals could serve a purpose (and they can redeem their status, loads of other remnants of the royal families throughout europe perform (with more or less useful stuff) quite well, considering they lost their "superior" status when some bad mannered (: sorry :) french guys started chopping...
and before anyone asks, yes the french "royalty" is pissed off ..and ineffective in every manner... Bet the average french "midinette" ("silly housewife") regrets that we don't have the dream closer to home. Bet they all tuned in to catch it if he stuttered or someone stepped on her gown (real useful shit :) ).
(@Mozared: i agree it's horrendus that the networks are so blattantly hype seekers ; don't watch tv to get pictures/videos of that sort of "incident", they think it would spoil the glam.. i'm sure they got on it, once the glam has finished you need to serve "terror" (to sell more bacon and shoes, never underestimate shoes (well, for women :) )
Anyway,
the BRITISH love their royalty,
the British people themselves would loose from it, if they were kicked out (influence, prestige (to other wankers yes, but these people have again clout blablabla) .. that would really would make them useless.
Again, i come from one of the few places who chopped
and
again, i agree with Tolkfan, MONARCHY IS A REMNANT,
all royals must be (for empyrical needs/reasons) "dethroned". The fact that they are parading makes me feel the same as confronting people who make too much money for their own good and hence feel somehow allowed to flaunt and parade...
I have to agree that the Monarchy don't really serve a useful purpose in this modern age. That said, I still love the fact that we have one :)
The united kingdom has become very multi-cultural over the last few decades and the general culture is becoming less and less "British". The monarchy stand as a symbol that we are still British and thats something I never hope to lose, even if it means paying a bit in taxes every year :)
The monarchy is just one of those iconic features that every country has. America have their declaration of independence, we have our monarchy :)
Next in-line for the throne is Prince Charles, the Queen's eldest son. However, its possible he may choose not to be king due to his age and standing, in which case it will go straight to Prince William :)
Harry would become king if William died with no children to succeed him :D
they are the descendants of the ex most influential people in England. They themselves don't really have power but it is pretty much all for British traditions. Can you imagine the prince enlisting in the army and being a general in actual combat? I certainly can't.
If you actually googled your sentence you would see Prince Harry was performing frontline combat in Afghanistan for several months until the media outsted him, and there is a long tradition of Royals fighting in the services. Prince Andrew fought in the Falklands for instance.
Prince William has gone back to work today as a RAF search and rescue pilot after having the weekend and monday off like most other people in the country for the bank holiday.
The Royal Family does take some public money but does provide a lot of tourism money. Most of their income comes from their own private assets.
They are used to represent Britain abroad and are heavily involved in charities.
They don't have any real powers, they are now more of a very wealthy family who perform traditions relating to government. Theres no disgrace in a democratic country keeping a bit of tradition and ceremony that in no way affects government policy.
@Mozared: Go
Eh, I'm not too angry, just when people come across as complete jerks and are not open to anyone Else's opinion but there own. I don't mind people being gay, I surely don't support it though, but its there choice. I don't mind having a nice discussion over something like this but when someone says something like "No, I think I'll wait until you make a 3rd post saying you're too stupid to understand," it really pisses me off.
Anyway, right on with the thread.
And yeah, are you a Brit?
Which is why my post was worded as an "in general", and not directed fully at you =P
That said - no, I'm a Dutchy;
Missed that part, my bad. :)
dont understand the hype about it and cant be bothered(aussy here)
@iSaintx: Go
So how about you give some arguments, hmmm? Your first post contained them, but (as you addmited) it was a mistake. You called me an idiot in the next two posts, that doesn't count as arguments.
Please anyone, do explain to me how it isn't a disgrace for a democratic country to still maintain a King, Queen and and a whole royal family? Don't tell me what their "powers" are, tell me why they should have them.
Also, just to clear things up: I do not burn gays. Although I am an atheist, so I eat infants on occasion, but who doesn't have small quirks, right?
@Tolkfan: Go
Actually, Prince Harry IS a general in Afghanistan. :).
@wOlfLisK: Go
probably just hanging out in his plush trailer though. Royalty usually are armchair generals cuz if they die who leads the country?
@Reaper872: Go
Actually, he was front line I think
Edit: Plus he's probably not going to be king anyway. I'm not sure of his position in line to the throne, but i'm 90% sure he's not that high up.
Sorry missed the whole thing.. i thought it funny though cause even blimmin' scottish people eat that shit up :)
Charlie cooking... he stole every bid he's doing in the video... and it comes out real nice too <3
About no monarchy...
boy,
am i going to have to be the one to pretend i don't agree with Tolkfan about the "hurt" one MUST feel about monarchy (in general)
and
explain that it is, as it always is, just a question of money...
Being a "royal", it's a media survivor bid.. as in they help sell bacon, oil, underwear (you name it) ; plenty of "nobles" in europe are great at it... they actually make societal advancement, being useful ..
as angry captain igloo mentioned, they don't have to "play", they can't be fired, disconnected or "ignored" for faring poorly, but they are there...
And for ENGLAND (which adults call the United Kingdom (it hosts loads of non english people, remember ;) )
The tudors had it gran.. the windsor are next to useless.. the last good one was during the war/depression...
Mr hugebig ears further ruined most of their credit by "carmelia ing" dianna ... his ma had to bitchslap him something fierce
(boy do people need their soaps). :)
Royals could serve a purpose (and they can redeem their status, loads of other remnants of the royal families throughout europe perform (with more or less useful stuff) quite well, considering they lost their "superior" status when some bad mannered (: sorry :) french guys started chopping...
and before anyone asks, yes the french "royalty" is pissed off ..and ineffective in every manner... Bet the average french "midinette" ("silly housewife") regrets that we don't have the dream closer to home. Bet they all tuned in to catch it if he stuttered or someone stepped on her gown (real useful shit :) ).
(@Mozared: i agree it's horrendus that the networks are so blattantly hype seekers ; don't watch tv to get pictures/videos of that sort of "incident", they think it would spoil the glam.. i'm sure they got on it, once the glam has finished you need to serve "terror" (to sell more bacon and shoes, never underestimate shoes (well, for women :) )
Anyway,
the BRITISH love their royalty,
the British people themselves would loose from it, if they were kicked out (influence, prestige (to other wankers yes, but these people have again clout blablabla) .. that would really would make them useless.
Again, i come from one of the few places who chopped
and
again, i agree with Tolkfan, MONARCHY IS A REMNANT,
all royals must be (for empyrical needs/reasons) "dethroned". The fact that they are parading makes me feel the same as confronting people who make too much money for their own good and hence feel somehow allowed to flaunt and parade...
@houndofbaskerville: Go
I have to agree that the Monarchy don't really serve a useful purpose in this modern age. That said, I still love the fact that we have one :)
The united kingdom has become very multi-cultural over the last few decades and the general culture is becoming less and less "British". The monarchy stand as a symbol that we are still British and thats something I never hope to lose, even if it means paying a bit in taxes every year :)
The monarchy is just one of those iconic features that every country has. America have their declaration of independence, we have our monarchy :)
@wOlfLisK: Go
Next in-line for the throne is Prince Charles, the Queen's eldest son. However, its possible he may choose not to be king due to his age and standing, in which case it will go straight to Prince William :)
Harry would become king if William died with no children to succeed him :D
@Cloud_Wolf: Go
It costs 20p per person to keep the Monarchy apparently, but they bring in a lot more in tourism etc.
Theres a lot of ignorance in this thread.
For starters sorry for quoting but it was the previous page:
If you actually googled your sentence you would see Prince Harry was performing frontline combat in Afghanistan for several months until the media outsted him, and there is a long tradition of Royals fighting in the services. Prince Andrew fought in the Falklands for instance.
Prince William has gone back to work today as a RAF search and rescue pilot after having the weekend and monday off like most other people in the country for the bank holiday.
The Royal Family does take some public money but does provide a lot of tourism money. Most of their income comes from their own private assets. They are used to represent Britain abroad and are heavily involved in charities.
They don't have any real powers, they are now more of a very wealthy family who perform traditions relating to government. Theres no disgrace in a democratic country keeping a bit of tradition and ceremony that in no way affects government policy.