Should The Monarchy Be Abolished ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ardross
  • Start date Start date

Should the monarchy be abolished

  • Now

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • When HM The Queen dies

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • When Prince Charles dies

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • If Harry( ginger cad ) is first in line

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Not at all

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ardross

Guest
They are an appalling waste of public money - once Queenie dies they should go .
 
We should be proud of our Monarchy; they are our heritage. They give the country an identity, one we should be proud of. Why the hell would we want to become a republic to have prats like Blair, Bush or Clinton in charge?? Most of the country can't even be bothered to vote for the Government, what makes anyone think they would vote for a president? The country wallows in apathy & a republic wouldn't make them change their ways - we'd then be left wide open to having some horrific extremist voted in, or worse.
 
One of this country's major problems is its' divisive and outdated class structure, the ultimate embodiment of which is the monarchy ...

(Sod the coat, where's me suitcase .? :D )
 
The Monarchy being abolished wouldn't automatically mean we would have to appoint a President.

It all boils down to this - does the practical uselessness of the Monarch in relation to the day to day needs to guarantee and protect a person's absolute right to live a free and content life outweigh the....do I need to go on?
 
Lizzie obviously has her mother's genes and will probably go on for another 20 odd years. At that point, big ears will be past it, so that would be the perfect time to call an end to the biggest spongers off the state.
 
Another thing. It was pointed out on Talksport tonight, that if big ears and the camel get hitched in St George's chapel in Windsor, the law states it has to be made available to any members of the public who wish to be wed there. Yeah right. Like that's going to happen!
 
There is little wrong with the monarchies in Scandinavia and in Holland. From what I have seen of presidents I'd prefer a constitutional monarchy along those lines.
 
I voted "not at all" - They are hilarious. I always find it amusing to watch the truely worthy, righteous and talented having to bow and grovel before them.
 
I'm not bothered either way. We're bound to end up with an arse whatever his or her title is.

The Queen however has done the job properly, whatever you think of the job itself.
 
I voted "If Harry( ginger cad ) is first in line" because he has one of those faces you could slap all day and not get bored !!!
 
Because there are so many nauseating Royalists among tourists - ironically many of them Republican voting Americans - the monarchy earn money for the country via tourism.

But I don't care - they give a very negative impression of the country I was born and live in, the whole notion of having a monarchy has nothing to do with egalitarianism, meritocrocracy or democracy and they should be not only abolished immediately, but all be executed live on pay-per-view TV, available on a global platform, with all revenues going into the NHS. :lol:
 
Originally posted by Ardross@Feb 11 2005, 11:09 PM
They are an appalling waste of public money - once Queenie dies they should go .
Click to expand...
Much cheaper than have a Chirac.
 
No, it's not "Best in Show with Five Heads", Dom - it's just "Best in Show"! C'mon, dearie, let's go quietly, now...

Coincidentally, was talking about this at Plumpers today with colleagues. No-one was interested in retaining the mob. 'Their money should be given to The People!' opined one. Not the Daily Mail, then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top