| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Queen Camilla?; Should she become queen? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 2 2007, 05:52 AM (809 Views) | |
| Excella | Jun 2 2007, 04:25 PM Post #16 |
|
Midnight Caller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's true. But I guess they would pass it on to William or Harry in that case. Because like Nicola said, she probably won't be considered queen even when Charles becomes king (if he does).
The reasons I am against "divine right," are the same reasons the founding fathers of America were strongly against including any form of royalty in the constitution. I don't believe that leaders, mostly public figures or not, should be determined by family. |
![]() |
|
| Lugiatm | Jun 2 2007, 04:37 PM Post #17 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think it's nice to have that little bit of tradition in an increasingly modern and competitive political world. Besides, as Amby said, she doesn't really exercise her powers anyway so there's no harm in having her there. |
![]() |
|
| Nicola | Jun 2 2007, 06:36 PM Post #18 |
|
Zatharawrus
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I completely agree. In an era where there is so much political bull**** its nice to have something that dates back hundreds of years. Monarchs shaped the way we are today. It's great that we still have the royal family as a reminder of the great kings and queens of the past. What does America have? A President who likes to contradict himself and a state full of drug taking, drunk 'A-listers'. Yeah..America has it better than we do. Sure. Their big people are movie stars. Ours is our long line of royalty twinned with our long and rich(not the money kind of rich) history. I wouldn't change that for anything. I love living in a country that has something so profound and unique to the world's superpower. Paris Hilton may think shes Queen of the US but we have a real one, who has descended from great people. |
![]() |
|
| Locke | Jun 2 2007, 06:41 PM Post #19 |
|
That one guy
|
In a similar manner though, what have our recent presidents or presidential candidates done to deserve the job other than have the most money or best team of workers to get them the job? |
![]() |
|
| .esoteric | Jun 2 2007, 06:42 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Laffy Taffy Rots Your Teeth
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What the hell is the point of the monarchy. We're just giving people money for doing nothing. |
![]() |
|
| Astheria | Jun 2 2007, 06:43 PM Post #21 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Agreed, some of the best candidates will never be heard. Hilary and Obama are each spending $100 MILLION on their election campaigns. Couldn't that money go to a better cause? ^o) |
![]() |
|
| Wisp | Jun 2 2007, 06:59 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Hello.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Why the attack on America and how does it have anything to do with the topic at hand?
|
![]() |
|
| Locke | Jun 2 2007, 07:01 PM Post #23 |
|
That one guy
|
^o) Because the discussion had become largely whether a system rather like the US would be a better thing than the British Monarchy. And it wasn't really an attack. It's pretty much true.
|
![]() |
|
| Amberon | Jun 2 2007, 07:11 PM Post #24 |
|
Winter is Coming
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Except from retaining traditional and valuable ties with the Commonwealth so as to retain a steady market for British exports and to gain cheaper imports that aren't restricted by high tariffs. If it weren't for the Queen, I'm sure that the Commonwealth would be much smaller than it is now and probably lacking Australia and Canada.
|
![]() |
|
| .esoteric | Jun 2 2007, 07:38 PM Post #25 |
![]()
Laffy Taffy Rots Your Teeth
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's exactly what I want, Canada to move away from the monarchy, don't really care bout australia though. And an elected official could probably do everything you said too. |
![]() |
|
| Calabur | Jun 2 2007, 08:04 PM Post #26 |
|
ルイス
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whilst I agree that some candidates are over-looked, because they simply don't have the resources to compete with the 'big names', you still get some sort of choice, and can decide who runs your country. We don't. We can't vote people into the royal family, who are apparantly higher than Tony Blair in power, who we can vote for. The Queen may not use all the power that she has, but it is still there. All it takes is for Charles to go a bit crazy, and England is screwed. Well, not really, because things they say have to be passed by the house of (commons/lords, not sure which), but that power is still there. ![]() It's sort of like the old days, where if you were born into a class (lower class, middle class, upper class, etc.), you couldn't move from it, there's still some form of class there, which is wrong in my opinion. |
![]() |
|
| Silicon Hero | Jun 2 2007, 08:07 PM Post #27 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In my American ignorance I was not even aware that the royal family still played a role in the politics of europe. I thought it was mostly traditional. Could someone please inform me? |
![]() |
|
| Amberon | Jun 2 2007, 08:33 PM Post #28 |
|
Winter is Coming
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Of course, something that is beneficial to Canada is bad for Canada. ![]() The problem with an elected official is that the elected official is embroiled in politics.
They play an ambassadory role sometimes. |
![]() |
|
| Wisp | Jun 2 2007, 08:44 PM Post #29 |
![]()
Hello.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Perhaps the topic is a bit broader then it was when it once began, but drug users, George Bush, and Hollywood aren't. As foul as they may be, they aren't in existence simply because we don't have a monarchy. In addition to that, those icons doesn't compose America. Behind our deep flaws which seem to get most of the attention, America is a fine country. |
![]() |
|
| Postulate | Jun 6 2007, 03:07 AM Post #30 |
![]()
You're the point
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Disagree'd - I don't think it's true. Stating that those who have held the royal crown of England and then Great Britain were "great people" is an incredible overstatement. Anyone who has taken a Euro 101 class will find that arbitrary exercise of power and a divine birthright does not the most effective form of government make. Now, is America any better? I don't think so at all - but pretending that the monarchy in England was descended from purity is laughable, and let's face it, the monarchy today is little more than a figurehead. And America does have somewhat of a nice political tradition, in that the Yankees did reestablish the concept of classical democracy using the ideals of the Enlightenment for the first time since the fall of the Roman Republic (though it too was often bloated and corrupt) and in doing so mustered support of the French Revolution and many other liberalized political movements. We also live in the world's oldest surviving federation, proving that a president can work as well; Europe had many constitutional monarchies near America's birth. My point is this - America isn't a country of evil, fat people as many of you seem to think. In fact, all of the West nowadays is pretty much the same (largely thanks to British and American efforts, of course). PS: I'm biased as I'm Irish and ******* hate the history of the ******* British monarchy and its ignorance, indulgence, and stupidity. ![]() 6 |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:35 AM Jul 11
|



![]](http://b1.ifrm.com/0/1/0/p601690/pipright.png)





Well, not really, because things they say have to be passed by the house of (commons/lords, not sure which), but that power is still there. 

4:35 AM Jul 11