Chris_Sleeps Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I said that their family was cleverer than yours I like it so I'll play along. Arguing from evolution, I'm a raging success. My family have been clever and hard working enough to put me where I am today, so I don't feel any envy to old Liz. Now, her being Queen is different. She got that from accident of birth, and has not earnt it one tiny little bit. She's earnt it as much as I have earnt two arms and two legs. They were there when my Mum pushed me out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I like it so I'll play along. Arguing from evolution, I'm a raging success. My family have been clever and hard working enough to put me where I am today, so I don't feel any envy to old Liz. Now, her being Queen is different. She got that from accident of birth, and has not earnt it one tiny little bit. So what you've gained from your family's efforts is earned, but what someone else has gained from their family's efforts is mere accident of birth? It's not a very strong argument is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I believe i've said this before. I'm no Royalist but have nothing against them. I would show respect because that's what I was brought up to do regardless of wealth or posession or position in life. edit; And I have no problem with their wealth or posessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shogun Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 None of them have ever done a proper days work in there life the present bunch are nothing but usurpers a mix of Germans and Greeks who have nothing in common with this country at all the last true king of this country was Richard3rd his crown was stolen from him by cheating and lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 None of them have ever done a proper days work in there life the present bunch are nothing but usurpers a mix of Germans and Greeks who have nothing in common with this country at all the last true king of this country was Richard3rd his crown was stolen from him by cheating and lies. Since it was cheating and lies that put him on the throne to begin with, that seems appropriate. How far back do you want to go to find a king that is a "true" king and wasn't descended from someone who obtained the crown by right of conquest? It will be at least 1,300 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 i'm against the civil list for so many reasons, but can see the tourist benefit the queen brings to the uk, so she could be retained, the rest should get zero from us, and be made to earn a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein only held power because they spread their respective countries' wealth among their families and close associates. If they had survived then several generations down the line their descendants would have been in the same position as the Royal Family. Inherited power and wealth are the mainstays of dynasties throughout history and the Windsors are no different. The only clever thing about them is that managed not to lose their wealth and position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shogun Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Since it was cheating and lies that put him on the throne to begin with, that seems appropriate. How far back do you want to go to find a king that is a "true" king and wasn't descended from someone who obtained the crown by right of conquest? It will be at least 1,300 years. His unbroken family line came from King Offa who was said to be the first King of this country,I'm not a history professor or any thing just always been interested in history and like reading about things like that,nothing has ever been proven about how he disposed of his two nephews as that kind of history has always been wrote by the winners if that is what you mean,but how he lost his crown is well documented,stolen on the battle field at Bosworth by the Tudor family who the present lot hark back to along the lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Since it was cheating and lies that put him on the throne to begin with, that seems appropriate. How far back do you want to go to find a king that is a "true" king and wasn't descended from someone who obtained the crown by right of conquest? It will be at least 1,300 years. If you go back that far then you're looking at local kings, not a king of England, let alone Britain and the commonwealth. Athelstan was the first king of England and no prizes for guessing how he got that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 But it was alright for one of her distant relatives to chop the head off some other bloke and proclaim himself ruler? Are you saying violence is only acceptable when you decree it to be so? Your typical right wing political misguidance.....blah...blah....blah...blah... I'm hardly in a position to apply the law to events which took place hundreds of years ago - are you? Does that make it okay for one of us to fantasise about assaulting a small, frail old woman? I think not, as that would imply having deeply worrying issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.