Tribute to Prince Philip...because he's a legend.

[Haunted]

Well said

[Grandpa]

Quoting Haunted from 17:32, 12th Apr 2006
Well said

Thanks

[hr]

We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.

[KayBee]

Can I add one of my own to the original list?

I'm about 10 years old (16 years ago), it's the last day of term and we're all out on parade to meet Her Maj and Prince Phillip. The do the usual hand shaking, accepting posies of flowers and stuff, then they reach me and my mate.

Queenie keeps walking but Prince Phillip stopped to chat:

Phil: It's the start of the holidays today isn't it?
Me: Yes Sir
Phil: When does school finish
Mate: 2.15 Sir
Phil: So is that when you are going to take all your clothes off?

EEP!

Now I know he meant take our school uniforms off and put on playing clothes but yikes - it doesn't half sound a bit dodgy.

[KayBee]

Double Post - oops

[novium]

1)The tourists would go to see the palaces etc without a royal family.

2)your monarchs don't do much actual governing. Power corrupts as they say, and now that the royal family's power has been limited to well defined figure-head roles, there's hardly all that much room for corruption, is there? They're just celebrities.

3)Having a written constitution (and laws in general, but that's not important for this discussion), easily accessible to all, is one of the foundations of the rule of law. The unwritten constitution is based on precedent and tradition, which makes it fairly easy to change, don't you think? Nothing is guaranteed. Additionally, do you really think all legitimacy derives from the crown, in thisday and age? Or that the queen, really does all that much 'overlooking'.

4)The office of the president has in fact waxed and waned in power. This century, to be sure, it has more waxed then waned, but isn't that always the nature of power? However, it will eventually correct itself.
5)once again, is she really doing all that much guaranteeing? And even if she were, how can you ensure that she will be fair herself? We at least only have to put up with a bad president for 4 to 8 years. And, we can always kick them out in the meantime.
6)The thing I don't think you've addressed is that if a monarchy has enough power to do all those things you are waxing on about, the have enough power to be corrupt and do whatever the hell they want, and I don't see how that is a good thing. If they don't have that much power, than what is the use of them? they're unable to do those things.

7)Oh yes, because monarachy has historically turned out great and good leader after great and good leader. Look at the roman empire. I can think of many examples of good emperors (chosen, either adopted or put into power through politics) who then wanted their sons/closest relative to follow them, who was then a disaster.
Besides, how does being related to a family prove merit? As you've probably figured out, I'm a solid republican (little r). Usually, I don't care about the monarchy. if you all want to have one, fine, whatever floats your boat, it's not my country after all. But when you start contrasting it with something I believe in very strongly (republicanism), then I feel free to jump right in.

Quoting grandpa from 17:21, 12th Apr 2006
1)One tourist comes over to see Bucks Palace and...
- pays entrance fee
- will probably buy souvenirs
- not to mention buying postcards and stamps

2)The US is quite simply Democracy Gone Wrong: wealthy lobbyists and corporate giveaways. American democracy, they say, fosters a greed of the positions of leadership, while our monarchs govern out of a sense of duty and heritage.

3)This country's constitution is unique in characther, having evolved from a long history, some of it turbulent, to give us a constitution that is able to evolve with the times - rather than being one written down and codified in one place it draws upon the only thing that can truly shape anyone or anything's existence: experience.In this green and pleasant land, our monarchy is our source of all state authority, and a necessary link for all the processes involved. Can you imagine authority of this kind, codified and written up in a full and final type - all the functions of a Head of State granted to a President? Imagine the corruption and backroom deals that would be done. 4)This is most evident in the USA, where the president has enjoyed an ever increasingly powerful remit, almost since the office of President was instituted. America is overlooked by business. We are overlooked by a human, one essentially unaffected and impartial to the interests of the corporate bodies of the business world. 5) She is our guarantee that Britain shall always be ruled fairly without the difficulies attributed to necessarily difficult ammendment processes.

6Hereditary monarchy keeps politicians in their place as representatives of the greater populace: However well known, distinguished and prominent a Prime Minister may become, he is always subject to a higher personal authority - an authority with no personal interest/agenda in governance: an authority, it must be said, with only duty to fulfill. 7)Furthermore, it is better to keep one family in such a position as experience may then be handed down from tutor to tutee and the valuable lessons leaned over ages then accumulated and passed on. If the family were changed, it would be increasingly hard to do this. At the risk of repeating myself: It is the Crown which is dutifully obliged, without personal interest or favour to anyone or any organisation.

I could say more, but will wait for the right time!

[hr]

We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.

[hr]

"In anger nothing right or judicious can be done."

[motorhead]

Quoting grandpa from 17:21, 12th Apr 2006

Quoting motorhead from 12:39, 12th Apr 2006
Going on holiday on the back of the tax payers money abusing people on the back of tax payers money. When i said nothing i meant nothing of any use at all.

I believe you are more ignorant than I first feared.

The Royal Family, in general, provides this country with far more use than any other stately family ever could. As has been said, it brings in hundreds of millions of pounds worth of tourist business - think about it for a moment: One tourist comes over to see Bucks Palace and...
- pays entrance fee
- will probably buy souvenirs
- not to mention buying postcards and stamps

furthermore, s/he...

- needs a place to stay
- needs to eat
- needs to travel (within Britain - let alone the cost of getting here)

And is most likely a member of a family.

Now, if we say the average tourist stays for one week - well, you do the maths. Then multiply that by the number of tourists every year that go to Bucks.

And there's more:

The US is quite simply Democracy Gone Wrong: wealthy lobbyists and corporate giveaways. American democracy, they say, fosters a greed of the positions of leadership, while our monarchs govern out of a sense of duty and heritage.

"Well may we say God save The Queen, because nothing will save the Govenor General." Gough Whitlam. 11 November 1975.

This country's constitution is unique in characther, having evolved from a long history, some of it turbulent, to give us a constitution that is able to evolve with the times - rather than being one written down and codified in one place it draws upon the only thing that can truly shape anyone or anything's existence: experience. It is part of this experience that on January 30, 1649 King Charles I of England, Scotland, and Ireland was executed. Why? To stop the absolutism that had become characterstic of monarchy. Now we enjoy a monarchy that is subject to the same laws and rules of everyday life as the rest of us. So although the monarch exercises very little power on a personal basis, she is still central to the political and jural system we enjoy. The Crown is the central authority under which the executive, legislature, judiciary, civil, military and religious services, not to mention other institutions, all operate. The Crown gives the final and binding approval, namely the Royal Assent, to legislation. In this green and pleasant land, our monarchy is our source of all state authority, and a necessary link for all the processes involved. Can you imagine authority of this kind, codified and written up in a full and final type - all the functions of a Head of State granted to a President? Imagine the corruption and backroom deals that would be done. This is most evident in the USA, where the president has enjoyed an ever increasingly powerful remit, almost since the office of President was instituted. America is overlooked by business. We are overlooked by a human, one essentially unaffected and impartial to the interests of the corporate bodies of the business world. She is our guarantee that Britain shall always be ruled fairly without the difficulies attributed to necessarily difficult ammendment processes.

Hereditary monarchy keeps politicians in their place as representatives of the greater populace: However well known, distinguished and prominent a Prime Minister may become, he is always subject to a higher personal authority - an authority with no personal interest/agenda in governance: an authority, it must be said, with only duty to fulfill. Furthermore, it is better to keep one family in such a position as experience may then be handed down from tutor to tutee and the valuable lessons leaned over ages then accumulated and passed on. If the family were changed, it would be increasingly hard to do this. At the risk of repeating myself: It is the Crown which is dutifully obliged, without personal interest or favour to anyone or any organisation.

I could say more, but will wait for the right time!

[hr]

We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.

Couldnt be arsed reading your thread because it is boring but when someone spends money at Buckingham Palace the money goes to the big fat rich royals to keep them in ski equipment and caviar

[jequirity]

Prince Phiilip, Duke of Edinburgh is a Bloody Legend!!! Everything he says is unbeatable, he really refreshes the stale lives we lead, shackled by the overzealous politically correct society imposed by a bunch of insecure wankers.

Yay for the Prince!




[hr]

LEEERRRROYYYY!!!!

Andrew W K Day 9th of May

[Colleen]

Ah, the monarchy. That wonderful institution that has, over the past few thousand years, beggared countries so personal vendettas against other monarchies can be fulfilled, imposed incredibly harsh laws on people, become inbred under the assumption that the only suitable person to wed is one of the same class who is probably a second cousin at best, shove their personal opinions on a country with little regard for that countries best interest or opinion, cause genocide and purges, believe they are rightfully descended from God and have a right to act as selfishly as they do, make offensive comments and above all are protected by nothing but quite flimsy tradition and enjoy massive privileges for no reasons other than an act of birth?

Yes, that's a fine system indeed. No system is perfect, for obvious reasons, but monarchy - especially bloody hereditary monarchy - is particularly flawed.

[Al]

You cannot have it both ways. Either monarchies have existed for thousands of years or they are protected by flimsy tradition.

[Colleen]

Ah, I apologise, I didn't make myself clear enough.

Current monarchy in its current form is a flimsy tradition that has little place in a modern society.

Yes, I respect it's an institution that's lasted for thousands of years, but so is torture as part of the judicial process. Tradition does not equal good.

[Haunted]

Quoting Colleen from 20:35, 12th Apr 2006
Ah, the monarchy. That wonderful institution that has, over the past few thousand years, beggared countries so personal vendettas against other monarchies can be fulfilled, imposed incredibly harsh laws on people, become inbred under the assumption that the only suitable person to wed is one of the same class who is probably a second cousin at best, shove their personal opinions on a country with little regard for that countries best interest or opinion, cause genocide and purges, believe they are rightfully descended from God and have a right to act as selfishly as they do, make offensive comments and above all are protected by nothing but quite flimsy tradition and enjoy massive privileges for no reasons other than an act of birth?

I must have missed the last genocide the Queen ordered.

[jequirity]

Colleen, the monarchy did some of what u described a long time ago, stop crying over spilt milk.

Can't remember any mention of genocide in the history books either, think ure slightly wrong there mate.


If u soley judge a subject by its past you'l never learn to forget and forgive and be constantly stuck with out-dated notions. The monarchy has changed, but there are always gonna be people like yourself around, some things never change.

[hr]

LEEERRRROYYYY!!!!

Andrew W K Day 9th of May

[Colleen]

Merely pointing out that this 'glorious history' of monarchy that seems to mean we should keep the monarchy around is not exactly glorious. I'm speaking, there, of the institution as a whole, including dynasties from Africa, Eastern Europe, China, Japan, etc, etc. As governments go, no, it's not stable and generally it's just not a good idea.

I just honestly don't see the point of keeping ours around. The only actual reason given thus far, other than the rallying cries of "TRADITION!" seems to be tourism and the need for a national figurehead, both of which I can see and understand but I don't believe that royalty is the way forward for the second one, or that they're that integral to the tourist industry.

I'm not going to insult people who support the monarchy, because fine, that's their opinion and having an opinion, especially some of the eloquent summings up I've seen on this thread, is certainly not a crime. Personal insults to my person aren't going to make me feel guilty for feeling the way I do towards the monarchy. I think some monarchs - King Juan Carlos of Spain leaps to mind - are actually vaguely useful or at least supportive of The People (God, what a term), but the money we spend on the monarchy, coupled with the sheer amount of those we have to support, seems wasteful to me, especially given they're incredibly distant from The People and don't return the favour.

I'm told that some Royals are lovely people, and I can get that. The Queen seems affable enough to me as a human being, for example. I just dislike what they're meant to stand for - deference! tradition! old-fashioned morals! - in a modern progressive society.

[Power Metal Dom]

Ok A LOT has been said but this happens to almost EVERY thread that is ever posted. I wouldn't normally say something about it but I've seen it once too often...that and I'm bored...

A thread about happy bunnys is posted and then we have 1 ignorant, opinionated, insensitive person who has to go on about something barely related purely for the pleasure of sparking a bit of trouble.

The quotes are for HUMOUROUS ENTERTAINMENT! Stop bringing the light-hearten nature of the post down and stop starting arguments with ignorant anti-autocratic comments or lengthy pompous retorts.

Like him or love him these quotes are funny! Appreciate them for the humour!

[hr]

Like flames on fuel...upon power metal I drool

http://www.myspace.com/domlovestoshred

[flarewearer]

Quoting Colleen from 22:03, 12th Apr 2006
I'm speaking, there, of the institution as a whole, including dynasties from Africa, Eastern Europe, China, Japan, etc, etc. As governments go, no, it's not stable and generally it's just not a good idea.

The constitutional Monarchy that is the United Kingdom seems to me to have been, in the last couple of hundered years at any rate, more stable than the republics and absolute monarchies of Europe. Other constitutional monarchies such as Belgium, Norway, the Netherlands etc. all seem to follow this trend. We have managed to avoid dictators, revolutions, juntas, communism, facism so far, if it's not broke, why fix it?

[hr]

[Manic23]

Quoting grandpa from 17:21, 12th Apr 2006


I believe you are more ignorant than I first feared.

The Royal Family, in general, provides this country with far more use than any other stately family ever could. As has been said, it brings in hundreds of millions of pounds worth of tourist business - think about it for a moment: One tourist comes over to see Bucks Palace and...
- pays entrance fee
- will probably buy souvenirs
- not to mention buying postcards and stamps

etc. etc. etc.

Hahaha, out of all the arguments that pro-monarchists have, this is my favourite.

For these tourists that come over: Does Liz actually stand out on the lawns of Buckinham palace flogging T-Shirts for a tenner? Can you pay to have your picture taken with her? Does she make surprise guest appearences on the tours?

But of course, Buckingham Palace couldn't function as a tourist attraction without Mrs. Windsor there. I mean, look at France and the empty Palace of Versailles, no tourists have ever darkened its doorstep...

Oh no wait

[Manic23]

Double Post

[exnihilo]

Modern progressive society, modern progressive society, that's what the anti-monarchy crowd always trumpets and then they say that the pro-monarchy people have no argument other than tradition, tradition.

Spot the irony, anyone?

[Smith]

I love prince phillip, and charles, and margeret.

i never met any others

[hr]

Cake, and fine wine.

[Gealle]

Hoping for humour can be fucking difficult at times.

I was on a course at the start of the year, and the seminar class were given three animals: elephant, dog, cat.

Asked to identify which was the odd one out and why, I simply said (given I had a good number of our Asian cousins living in the flats either side): 'elephant', don't think it's being cooked in my block.

Now, the other students were all laughing their arses off, but I didn't half get a grilling from the bitch afterwards.

Some people, eh?