llamatron Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 "and what would you replace "queen & country" with?" how 'bout just plain "country" ? I very doubt much she would prepare to sacrifice her life for mine so why should I do same for her ? she would be much more likely to do it for you than you would for her. She has been bred to a life of service and she takes it seriously. An elected version wouldn't give one and wouldn't be around for a lifetime so wouldn't build up the relationships with other countries that an unelected head of state can. You clearly know nothing about her job you are just jealous of her money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 You clearly know nothing about her job you are just jealous of her money. I don't like the "envy" argument. It's possible to disagree with monarchy without wanting to strip them of their natural wealth. I can dislike monarchy and not dislike Elizabeth of Windsor at the same time, it is possible. The best defence of our monarchy that i have read was by Stephen Fry. To paraphrase, he called them Britain's ugly nose, and when we have surgery to fix it we'll understand it was something that wasn't too ugly really, and then we'll be boring and like everyone else. Despite this i can't fight this feeling in my heart that it is silly and unjust that someone be born into such a role. It makes no sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukjazzer Posted December 8, 2010 Author Share Posted December 8, 2010 "constitutional monarchy?" Mmm, right then but I am under the impression we don't actually have a "constitution" as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukjazzer Posted December 8, 2010 Author Share Posted December 8, 2010 "Then can you explain how the country will be a better place to live if your activities are successful and it ceases to be a constitutional monarchy?" Could it be any worse ? France and Germany seem to be doing alright without a monarch don't they ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 "constitutional monarchy?" Mmm, right then but I am under the impression we don't actually have a "constitution" as such. We have a Queen because the people want it, our elected representatives could remove them if we wanted them too. What's undemocratic about that? You may not like it, but currently it's what the people want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukjazzer Posted December 8, 2010 Author Share Posted December 8, 2010 "It makes no sense to me." Exactly !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 she would be much more likely to do it for you than you would for her. She has been bred to a life of service and she takes it seriously. An elected version wouldn't give one and wouldn't be around for a lifetime so wouldn't build up the relationships with other countries that an unelected head of state can. You clearly know nothing about her job you are just jealous of her money. Well said, my sentiments exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ukjazzer Posted December 8, 2010 Author Share Posted December 8, 2010 "We have a Queen because the people want it" You honestly believe that ? I'm not so sure these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 "constitutional monarchy?" Mmm, right then but I am under the impression we don't actually have a "constitution" as such. We don't have a constitution in a democratic sense, a set of laws that government should run by. We have laws on how parliament and monarchy can interact dating from Magna Carter (1216) through to post civil war and The Bill of Rights (1689), and onwards i'm sure. We don't have a constitution like the americans have, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 8, 2010 Share Posted December 8, 2010 "constitutional monarchy?" Mmm, right then but I am under the impression we don't actually have a "constitution" as such. Cromwell made us a republic, but it went corrupt so he installed a monarchy to provide reigns. You can't in simple terms... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom It's made up of lot's of parts... We have a de facto constitution: Unlike many nations, the UK has no core constitutional document. It is therefore often said that the country has an unwritten, uncodified, or de facto constitution.[1] However, the word "unwritten" is something of a misnomer as much of the British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments, and treaties. The constitution has other unwritten sources, including parliamentary constitutional conventions and royal prerogatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.