The British Monarchy - Page 4




 
--
Boots
 
November 16th, 2004  
Locke
 
 
i like them because it separates the figurehead from the power, which can be a dangerous thing (dictators, some presidents etc) that siad, i think australia needs its own figurehead
this is why i was in favour of the last referendum down here, you had the president, who is hte figurehead, and the PM who ran the country
the royals serve thier purpose, which is to provide something for british people to look up to and adore, which lets face it, they do!(dont we all!!)
November 17th, 2004  
Darcia
 
I wouldn't say every one looks up to the British Crown and Adores um.
November 19th, 2004  
beardo
 
its part of our tradition

how many countries have something as historic and symbolic as a monarchy
--
Boots
November 20th, 2004  
Locke
 
 
well, my understanding is that most people within the UK feeling pretty strongly about the royals

and lets face it, they are a rather progressive bunch, they could be a heck of a lot worse
November 20th, 2004  
Darcia
 
They Probably could be alot worse however in todays day in age it realy doesn't matter that much what they do cause they basicly have no Political Power.
November 20th, 2004  
Locke
 
 
thats exactly right, as i said they are the head of state, not the head of government. this is a very common thing, in fact america is rather unique when it comes to having thier head of state and the head of guvernment beig one and the same.
its interesting being by being the head of state, they often have a fanatical following, which can lead to big headedness and the belief that they can do anything without reprecussions, because thier people love them so much. the being head of state gives them the following and support, and the head of governemtn gives them the ability to act.
as i have siad, this can be dangerous and the two should be separated as a safeguard
November 20th, 2004  
Airborne
 
??? And how exactly would we do that? The VP is the president of the Senate.... I guess that's sort of the division your suggesting.
November 20th, 2004  
A Can of Man
 
 
Well it's quite standard for Royal Family boys to join the military isn't it? Or else what else would they wear at the dinner parties? lol.

I say keep it. Saves the effort of explaining to children what Princes, Princesses and Kings and Queens are while reading a fairy tale. lol. Hopefully Prince William won't be a disappointment like Charles (in all fairness I think he got s****ed over) or his party crazed brother.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowalker
I do think that the majority of the royals should have proper jobs rather than just live off the queens and taxpayers money. But the queen, her sons and princes william and harry i can understand not working as they are more well known and do have some useful functions and it looks like harry and possibly william will be joining the military.
November 20th, 2004  
Locke
 
 
airborne, i do not know enough about america to suggest how you would separate the two roles

lol @ royals having nothing to wear to dinner parties, lest they break social faux pas!
November 20th, 2004  
Lyceum2
 
I would see the Monarchy regaining some of its former power although still being checked by a parliament, a parliament elected by the our countries elites!