» Home » Politics
It Is Time We Got Rid Of The Monarchy In Britain.
Is the idea of having a King or Queen of the country old-fashioned and outdated in the 21st century? Have your say.
 chaew  07 May 2008 08:16
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
The queen could be likened to being a prostitute, paid to have sex and produce offspring and make her living off her own back while living off the backs of the British taxpayers. Prostitutes parade around in public wearing ridiculous clothing to attract onlookers into paying. How is that not what the "royal family" does?

And that was an even more apt comparison about Di(e) and how she dressed the part.

If the lot of them really cared about the British public, they'd forfeit all their wealth and make Chuckie earn a living as a member of Parliament, plus his sons earn a living in the military if they enjoy doing it so much.

As a Canadian, I've long been opposed to the waste of money spent on them, but the thing that really ticked me off was seeing what happened in my province, British Columbia, back in 1994.

Queen Lizardbreath was brought in to open the Commonwealth Games in Victoria. Ok, fine. But then Lizardbreath was also brought in to open a university, a place of supposed education, yet opened by an old bat who hasn't done anything purposeful since she was an army mechanic in World War II.

Lizardbreath was asked to open a university the very year after Michael Smith of the University of British Columbia won a Nobel Prize for Chemistry. That shows just how f***ed up some people's priorities are: The university had a chance to show the height of what could be achieved in BC's universities, and the morons instead chose to employ a whore.
 
 K9  20 Oct 2009 11:09
 Add a Comment
 
 
What do they actually do, the queen is the biggest crook i know, they also were involved in dianas murder, it is time to get rid of these dinosaurs!!!!!!
 
 sean017  26 May 2008 01:26
 1 Comment
 
 Get a clue. Di(e) died because her driver was drunk and speeding.

The real loss behind that car accident wasn't her, it was Dodi Fayed. He was the man who put together the funding and produced the classic film, "Chariots Of Fire". We wouldn't have that film if it weren't for him.
by  K9
 20 Oct 2009 11:10
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Yes, definitely, its just rediculous to keep them.
 
 uberlovely  07 May 2008 12:28
 1 Comment
 
 why? If you feel strongly enough to type here, you surely must have some reason for your opinion.
by  StBalders
 07 May 2008 12:47
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
I agree, it should be dissolved. Too much of our tax money goes to supporting them in their palace. It's not as if they serve a practical any more, they're more of a lingering symbol of the once great British Empire. Who needs 'em? Outmoded and outdated, we would be better off without the monarchy.
 
 Jakers  07 May 2008 09:46
 Add a Comment
 
What about the national anthem, God Save the King/Queen?? And your money?? They are a must for England, they run the church and are the figure head for the country its something that looks kool
 
 dolphins  14 Nov 2008 00:52
 Add a Comment
 
 
The Monarchy Boost Britain's Economy By 15%
Take That Out And Where Does That Leave Us?
 
 ScottyRAWR  12 Aug 2008 12:37
 Add a Comment
 
 
I used to be anti Monarchy when I was younger and I am anti hereditary principle but there is something about the Monarchy...........or is it the Queen as an individual??? I think the Queen is an amazing person, she was born to be heir to the Throne, had Monarchy thrust upon her suddenly with the death of her father. Would I have these views if the Monarch were King Charles? Probably not.

Britain gains much from being a Constitutional Monarchy. What does it get from The Duke of Northumberland or the Earl Arundel?

The Labour Govt were right to remove hereditary peers from the House of Lords. It needs to complete the job and get rid of the rest.
 
 pallan281  13 May 2008 16:10
 Add a Comment
 
 
The monarchy is has existed pretty much since Britain began however i do think it should be made simpler. There are problems with this country which need to be dealt with and the queen is not one of them Gordon Brown is. Our monarchy is a symbol of Britain and costs us next to nothing but gains us a lot
 
 pooleyric  13 May 2008 11:40
 Add a Comment
 
 
Koranzite is right. Plus the amount of tax spent on the monarchy easily sees a return through tourism and boosts the economy.
 
 ibanex_87  07 May 2008 22:17
 Add a Comment
 
 
The monarchy may not serve a role in how the country is currently run, but it is a national symbol of Britain and should be kept to please the people. How many people would protest if the royal family was thrown out and told to work in a shoe store?
 
 Koranzite  07 May 2008 22:12
 2 Comments
 
 The pound coin is a symbol of Britain too, but you seem keen to get rid of that...
by  Jakers
 07 May 2008 22:15
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
They're a symbol of national identity and unity, as well as being diplomats and tourist attractions. Imagine if we replaced the monarchy with a president, then the national identity would be embodied in one politician which is something that sounds dangerous. The cost of the monarchy has been put in the region of £36 million, only around 80p per taxpayer, and this is probably recuperated in tourism anyway. They provide a link with our past and are a national tradition, one that makes Britain (almost) unique in todays world.
 
 Carl  07 May 2008 16:23
 Add a Comment
 
 
No. I think they do a great job. My wife works for Prince Edward and The Duke of Edinburgh and sees how hard they work. They didn't chose to be born into the life they have. The Queen said when she came to the throne that she would dedicate her life to the country, she has done just that. They are the best diplomats you could wish to have, the rest of the world is fascinated in them. The money they bring to the country through wining and dining powerful people from all over the world and through tourism far outweighs the cost to the taxpayer.

Just the fact that they are royals also brings in a huge amount of wealth for charity. I have seen first hand how rich people will give large amounts of money to charity just to be in the same room as a royal.

I wouldn't swap my paupers life for theirs. Give them the credit they deserve.
 
 StBalders  07 May 2008 10:13
 2 Comments
 
 But what have they actually done? I think don't think its necessary to have them. It's a very old fahion, and why can they clain they are royals from the beginning? we need to think about it!
by  uberlovely
 07 May 2008 12:27
Comment
  
Comment
  
Comment
  
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
Michael Delavar Will Do A Good Job
Christians Are Not Necessarily Liberal (Or Conservative)
The Voting And Military Enlistment Age Should Be Raised In The US
We Should Have Trusted George W.BUSH.
People Are Idiots For Thinking I Suggested Thanking The Whites For Freeing The Blacks That They Enslaved....
We Should Make Abortion Illegal
Obama's Economic Stimulus Plan Destroys America
For A Senator To Have An Affair While Openly Defending The Sanctity Of Marriage From The "evil" Gay People...
We Wouldn't Have Half The Problems We Do If There Weren't So Many Females In Politics.
Democracy Is Merely Dictatorship Of The Majority.
New Debates
Stop Making Fun Of Homosexuals. It's Offensive.
There Are No Original Ideas Left In Hollywood Cinema Anymore.
Is It The Case That The Majority Of People On This Site, Including Myself, Are Undiagnosed Cases Of Asperger's...
Alfred Hitchcock Said "A Good Film Is When The Price Of The Dinner, The Theatre Admission And The Babysitter...
The Definition Of Marriage Goes Beyond Culture And Religion. They Corrupt The True Meaning Of Things...
Are People Who Say They Don't Care If People Are Gay, But They Just Can't Stand And Don't Have Any Respect...
Resolved: The US Government Should Add A 15% Tax To All Unessential Food Items
It Is So Wrong To Call Lesbians *DYKES*
Teenagers Are Not Irresponsible Because Of Media
Voting Should Be Compulsory.