Royal Family

[Sickofrunning]

So sorry I can't use the vote (haven't a clue how to do it)
The questions is clear.. A simple yes or no..... After the Queen dies should the Royal Family continue... Yes or no!

@Sarahlou63

Yes, but with the caveat that the royal family should only consist of (i.e. be publicly funded by) the direct heir and his/her family in the same way as the Dutch and other modern European monarchies are now.

So no more Eugenie/Beatrice freeloading - Anne, Edward and Sophie are all doing a good job for the "Firm" but their children are (or will be) self sufficient in the future. Andrew will be a huge problem for Charles - fuck knows how that will play out.

Charles wants a a slim family.

Harry has put a spanner in the works though, as well as Andrew.

Duties will now fall on Charles&Camilla, Edward and Sophie, Anne, and William and Kate.

How am I lying? Over the past decade, William and Kate have consistently worked a lot less than the Queen and Charles, both of whom are getting on in years and should be able to start doing less.

Why should a relatively young, healthy man be praised for doing an event once every 1.5 days? Other men his age do actual work for 8 - 10 hours, 5 days a week. It's one thing to have a monarch as head of state, but it seems we're paying for the monarch's entire family to be idle, pampered and elevated above us. It's pointless.

Look at the state of turmoil in USA with bouncing from Obama to Trump to Biden, and different states regressing in abortion laws. There is no stability and that’s scarier than a tried and tested monarchy which itself must stick to strict rules.

This is an interesting read.

www.republic.org.uk/a_new_head_of_state

@blubberyboo

Look at the state of turmoil in USA with bouncing from Obama to Trump to Biden, and different states regressing in abortion laws. There is no stability and that’s scarier than a tried and tested monarchy which itself must stick to strict rules.

Agree. I would far rather have an apolitical head of state, and I say that as a citizen of a commonwealth country.

Like we are seeing in Scotland now. Nicola Sturgeon is hacking away at womens rights and being photographed with the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence who have links to PIE and other dubious organisations. if some one like her was head of this country women would be well and truly fucked. Absolutely

Prince Charles could be on the throne for 15 plus years.

[quote SprayedWithDettol]This is an interesting read.

www.republic.org.uk/a_new_head_of_state[/quote]
I gave up reading after the first paragraph.

Our elected head of state would not be allowed to make decisions based on their own political opinions (much like a judge uses their power according to the law and the facts of the case, not letting their personal politics get in the way)

We know Judges do make judgements of personal feelings and politics. Look at the men walking free after strangling their girlfriends to death. Look at the Judge who let a male midwife walk free after he was found to have have made and viewed child sex abuse. The judge also felt it was shame to the community to lose him. We know that judges also themselves are corruptible as just like Politicians as they are both open to blackmail. And we also know that Judges also get sent to prison for child sex abuse offences themselves. When Politicians and Judges expose themselves in such a manner it doesn't send the country in to chaos because we still have a clear head of state, it steadies us.

And as for following strict rules - well they can be overturned. Does Putin follow any rules?

Stability is better for us, which the monarchy brings wether you like them or not. People need to look past resentment and jealousy and really look at what being a republic does to a society.

There are no public protests, the Republic movement is actually small. A telephone poll by Mori suggests that 76% of people were still happy to have a Monarch, 1001 people were contacted. It was thought that the Harry and Meghan debacle would effect there popularity but its become apparent that it hasn't, look at the bun fights on here over them. The RF also have a lot of support on twitter. Prince Andrew is indeed an embarrassment and will have no doubt effected popularity but most people we see that it wasn't the Queen or Prince Charles that did it.

I look at the leaders of governments of the the past few years and think 'No thanks'

I would vote for the morcarchy every single time just to stop people like Sturgeon, Boris, Corbyn, Trump and Biden being sole leaders of this country.

Typos in there, not enough coffee yet!

I look at the leaders of governments of the the past few years and think 'No thanks'

I would vote for the morcarchy every single time just to stop people like Sturgeon, Boris, Corbyn, Trump and Biden being sole leaders of this country.

Yet when Johnson went to HMQ to agree to prorogue Parliament she agreed and was only stopped when Baroness Hales court put a stop to it.

@Pixxie7

Prince Charles could be on the throne for 15 plus years.

Given that he’ll probably be King in the next five years, I think that highly unlikely. I don’t think he’s going to live as long as his parents. He doesn’t look all that well for his age.

@Boilingicicle

I look at the leaders of governments of the the past few years and think 'No thanks'

I would vote for the morcarchy every single time just to stop people like Sturgeon, Boris, Corbyn, Trump and Biden being sole leaders of this country.

Yet when Johnson went to HMQ to agree to prorogue Parliament she agreed and was only stopped when Baroness Hales court put a stop to it.

But that just proves the system is working.

It would be working if Baroness Hale had been Head of State and had a word with Boris in the early stages to let him know his wish could not be carried out legally.

(She does have a nice line in bling and I think she could rally the troops - possibly she could be voted in as Head of State next?)