| 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 (807 Views) | |
| uuu | Jun 6 2007, 05:29 AM Post #31 |
|
Physical inactivity is mediocrity
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
She can't be Queen. She's not part of the royal family. |
![]() |
|
| Dave | Jun 6 2007, 07:09 AM Post #32 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
To suggest one is 'great' or to give a seat of power (No matter how limited that power may be) on the basis of blood is primitive. And I don't say that to take a jab at any other nation; it happens everywhere, including the U.S. It simply does not make sense to me how an individual is automatically worth more than someone else sheerly because they were born to the right people. (Again, I am not necessarily directing this in any particular nation's direction, but it is relevant, so I'm bringing it up.) So I think it goes without saying any further what I think of the monarchy. I have no sense of British nationalism, so I cannot really hold an opinion when taking traditional feelings about it into account, but the general idea of it is definitely flawed. In regards to the tradition aspect itself, yeah, the Monarchy definitely hasn't been entirely pure-blooded noble leaders throughout its years. I can still understand why it is a source of national pride, though. I know that I am certainly willing to look past some of my past leaders' weak points. Early American society (Including plenty of the more recognized individuals of the time period) was as hypocritical as you can possibly be when it came to things like the treatment of slaves or Native Americans. I don't think it's a problem at all that the Monarchy is something citizens take pride in. The Monarchy makes no practical sense. Not even on paper. But it's not as if it actually controls much (Or at least it chooses to not control much), so if its people support it, then it's fine. There's reasons for it in this day and age that are separate from actual rule, apparently. I personally would have problems with it having even the slightest amount of direct influence on my life (and despite the fact that I have had and perhaps currently have some less than stellar leaders, at the end of the day I know that I, as a part of the people, despite how ignorant and flatout daft and easily influenced-by-the-wrong-reasons that group can be, chose the current situation. George Bush was not [directly] born into his position [his family name certainly had something to do with it, but that isn't always the case and it was not the only contributing factor]. Not to mention that I trust my system to always protect me from even the most corrupt, undeserving, money-driven, last-name-driven individual completely bringing the country to its knees. At least they'll be limited, and there will be someone to blame besides just that particular individual. A lot of the same can be said for the British. But can all of it be said without the slightest doubt? I'm not so sure. There seems to be a lot of mere trust that the Monarchy will choose to keep things Democratic and not exercise some its current powers that could potentially cause some damage or leave the people out of decisions. Correct me if I'm incorrect on that, however. I am not speaking at this point with the greatest credibility in the world. I could certainly be wrong.), but who knows what tune I would be singing had I been raised under it. If that's all jumbled, then my apologies. The clock now reads 6 AM. I may not be no big city lawyer, but that indicates I've been up a while. So I think I shall summarize just in case: - I disagree with the Monarchy. - I don't think anything needs to happen the Monarchy, however, because it serves purposes that supersede anything to do with power. - In terms of total government, for my personal situation, I would prefer, even with forms of representation in place, to not have a Monarchy in place regardless. This is probably a result of the fact that I cannot really empathize with the part of the Monarchy that involves nationalism and such. I'm not saying America's government is at all better than any other nation's government, though. - I am not no big city lawyer. That about wraps it up. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:34 AM Jul 11
|



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



4:34 AM Jul 11