The British Monarchy

I've grown up in a monarchy, I've guarded my King and his family on multiple occasions, I have spent time with the King alone several times, because it was part of my duties... but I have absolutely no sympathy for the idea of any monarchy, royals should get NO respect or special treatment/benefits just because of which family they were born into. I would now bow to any regent, I would not treat them with any more respect than I would anyone I met on the street.
I find it utterly ridiculous that the human race, in the year of 2022, still have monarchies around the world. They should be abolished.

However, I of course understand and respect the fact that many people held the Queen close to their hearts, and my condolences goes out to you all.
 
Matt the Giant said:
I've grown up in a monarchy, I've guarded my King and his family on multiple occasions, I have spent time with the King alone several times, because it was part of my duties... but I have absolutely no sympathy for the idea of any monarchy, royals should get NO respect or special treatment/benefits just because of which family they were born into. I would now bow to any regent, I would not treat them with any more respect than I would anyone I met on the street.
I find it utterly ridiculous that the human race, in the year of 2022, still have monarchies around the world. They should be abolished.

However, I of course understand and respect the fact that many people held the Queen close to their hearts, and my condolences goes out to you all.
Click to expand...
Who is (was?) your King?
 
kaz7 said:
You have answered it , without them we would get presidents like boris or whoever the next **** that gets voted in , boris already copied trump and got his own plane and that waste of money room with the flags at downing street and tried to bring in daily news updates via his spokesman , leave that shit for the yanks
Click to expand...
I have never understood this ''better than having a President'' argument.
You've already said Boris copied Trump - the Monarchy has relatively few powers anyway. If we got rid of the royals we just keep electing a PM every 3-5 years as we have done. What difference does it make?
Britain doesnt elect a Prime Minister, we elect a party.
 
Mad Eyed Screamer said:
I have never understood this ''better than having a President'' argument.
You've already said Boris copied Trump - the Monarchy has relatively few powers anyway. If we got rid of the royals we just keep electing a PM every 3-5 years as we have done. What difference does it make?
Britain doesnt elect a Prime Minister, we elect a party.
Click to expand...

The better than having a President argument is nonsense. You only have to look at the Kings and Queens of Britain throughout history to see what despicable cretins they've been and atrocities carried out in their name.

The Monarchy wield whatever soft power they have, when it is in their financial interests to do so.

I believe the cult of personality took over a long time ago and, that most vote depending on the leader of the party, not the party itself.
 
ROCKET80 said:
The better than having a President argument is nonsense. You only have to look at the Kings and Queens of Britain throughout history to see what despicable cretins they've been and atrocities carried out in their name.

The Monarchy wield whatever soft power they have, when it is in their financial interests to do so.

I believe the cult of personality took over a long time ago and, that most vote depending on the leader of the party, not the party itself.
Click to expand...
Well the media certainly proved your point with the awful treatment dished out to Corbyn prior to the last election
 
Bill Walker said:
That would surely require a referendum.
Personally I feel it would be a good time after all the mourning of her Majesty to abolish all titles, Earl's, Duke's, Marquis, etc etc.
Also the House of Lords which the UK taxpayer is funding.
Click to expand...
Just to add......If this Royalty thing is carried on with and if Charlie care's as much as his Mother did about the role of Royalty, he would hand succession now to William and miss his go, the guy's is a weak fuckwit who cheated on his wife from day 1, and his wife has the morals of an alleycat.
But he doesn't care imo, he want's his name in history.
 
Bill Walker said:
Just to add......If this Royalty thing is carried on with and if Charlie care's as much as his Mother did about the role of Royalty, he would hand succession now to William and miss his go, the guy's is a weak fuckwit who cheated on his wife from day 1, and his wife has the morals of an alleycat.
But he doesn't care imo, he want's his name in history.
Click to expand...
And Charles is the first King to have had a mistress?
Maybe he should have had Diana's head chopped off like Henry VIIII and become a widower, to avoid being a divorcee?
And how many illegitimate kids did Edward VII have?
Plus the rest of them...
 
It always makes me laugh when people discuss whether Charles is fit to be king. That's the point of having a king. You don't get a choice. He's gonna be king whether he's fit to be or not. Then again, it's not as if democracy has given us a long line of competent leaders.

I also don't get the criticism of Charles. It's not like he's been out shagging randoms on the side. He had an affair with someone and then married her. How many millions of people do that?
 
Bill Walker said:
Just to add......If this Royalty thing is carried on with and if Charlie care's as much as his Mother did about the role of Royalty, he would hand succession now to William and miss his go, the guy's is a weak fuckwit who cheated on his wife from day 1, and his wife has the morals of an alleycat.
But he doesn't care imo, he want's his name in history.
Click to expand...
But william is the same, at least 2 affairs (one while she was preggers) and has a official concubine fir all his anal play, also a **** with his brother.

In charlies time he was told who to marry despite it not being who he wanted too.

If you weigh it up Wills is a bigger prick than his dad
 
I'm With Stupid said:
It always makes me laugh when people discuss whether Charles is fit to be king. That's the point of having a king. You don't get a choice. He's gonna be king whether he's fit to be or not. Then again, it's not as if democracy has given us a long line of competent leaders.

I also don't get the criticism of Charles. It's not like he's been out shagging randoms on the side. He had an affair with someone and then married her. How many millions of people do that?
Click to expand...
tbf
Mary QoS
James II
Charles I
Richard II
Edward VII


Sugests you do have a choice if we accept a monarch corination and reign, as either the establishment, parliament or public sentiment has seen all forced to abdicate or in one case die
 
Matt the Giant said:
The Swedish King.
Click to expand...


2074243-43480070-2560-1440.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top