Congratulation, Britain!
- Thread starter Janne
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
This thread was always going to go down this route I'm afraid.
The royal family make this country much more than they cost and they cannot do anything to harm the population (unlike the rulers of Westeros), and most of them do great work in charity support and the like. I can see no reason to change other than spite and jealousy.
The royal family make this country much more than they cost and they cannot do anything to harm the population (unlike the rulers of Westeros), and most of them do great work in charity support and the like. I can see no reason to change other than spite and jealousy.
Sorry!
In a PMQs question he congratulated the Duke of wessex on the birth of his son. Prince Harry is actually the Duke of Sussex. There isn't a Duke of wessex only an Earl who is is Prince Harry's uncle.
Case of picking the wrong County. He then went on to pose the pm a question aimed at promoting his party's position at the expense of the other parties.
As far as gaining the title of prince goes, in the UK it needs finite set of conditions. IIRC queen's sons and queen's heir's son and grandson get the title prince. If that isn't a criteria met by the Royal baby then he's not a prince unless the Queen bestows that title on him. Theoretically she can make any male offspring of any of her kids and grandkids a prince if she wanted. It's solely in her gift. The same with certain nobility titles such as earls and dukes. There's also strict rules concerning the HRH title too. Archie isn't a HRH and might never become one.
It's archaic and further complicated by it not being a define rule type of monarchy with absolute power. The Queen cannot bestow all titles only certain ones under the crown. I think it is only titles given to past monarchs, princes and royals that went vacant to get returned to the monarch. It's all written down what's possible and what's in the rules. Stupid really.
In a PMQs question he congratulated the Duke of wessex on the birth of his son. Prince Harry is actually the Duke of Sussex. There isn't a Duke of wessex only an Earl who is is Prince Harry's uncle.
Case of picking the wrong County. He then went on to pose the pm a question aimed at promoting his party's position at the expense of the other parties.
As far as gaining the title of prince goes, in the UK it needs finite set of conditions. IIRC queen's sons and queen's heir's son and grandson get the title prince. If that isn't a criteria met by the Royal baby then he's not a prince unless the Queen bestows that title on him. Theoretically she can make any male offspring of any of her kids and grandkids a prince if she wanted. It's solely in her gift. The same with certain nobility titles such as earls and dukes. There's also strict rules concerning the HRH title too. Archie isn't a HRH and might never become one.
It's archaic and further complicated by it not being a define rule type of monarchy with absolute power. The Queen cannot bestow all titles only certain ones under the crown. I think it is only titles given to past monarchs, princes and royals that went vacant to get returned to the monarch. It's all written down what's possible and what's in the rules. Stupid really.
So long as they got the Earl of Dumbarton right, that's okay
Whole other country, y'know ?Mr Merkel has overseen the most divisive policies in Europe since the last time Germany tried to be in charge
Funnily enough I still approve of the EU, just that it does need some serious work.
Edward's children are treated as those of an Earl, not a Prince. It seems to have become commonplace now. It's probably easier on the children as they grow up tbh, and a kindness really. Titles haven't really done Andrew's daughters any favours, have they ? and Anne's children and Pricess Margaret's have done without to no harm.
Archie ? so, Archibald or Archimedes ?
M
Spite and jealousy? Really? Is that your way of dismissing different opinions with regard to our political / democratic system? Attack the person not the opinion?
Ending a constitutional monarchy isn't about spite or jealousy. It's about questioning whether birthright has any role to play in our political system. Personally I do not believe in unelected persons having a role in decisions of State and provision of laws. That is whether you're talking of a house or lords or a monarch. Even though the monarch has few powers and chooses not to use them I still think they're not needed. Although there was a call by some for the queen to close parliament over Brexit. Legally she could have done that.
Ending a constitutional monarchy isn't about spite or jealousy. It's about questioning whether birthright has any role to play in our political system. Personally I do not believe in unelected persons having a role in decisions of State and provision of laws. That is whether you're talking of a house or lords or a monarch. Even though the monarch has few powers and chooses not to use them I still think they're not needed. Although there was a call by some for the queen to close parliament over Brexit. Legally she could have done that.
Ah, but, she didn't, did she ?
Not her role, she just quietly pointed out that discussion and agreement were good things....and let them stew themselves into total impotence.
M
Not her role, she just quietly pointed out that discussion and agreement were good things....and let them stew themselves into total impotence.
M
If the person shows such tendencies by the way they speak, yes. But, apologies, it wasn't actually targeted at you but at what I can only see as pointless opinion - if there is no advantage to this great country, and indeed there would be considerable disadvantage, I cannot see any logical argument that could support such a change. If there is no logical argument (because the country would be worse off) what other reasons can I assume people have for change?
Anyway, these 'discussions' always get too heated when people are behind keyboards so I'm bowing out now
- always happy to hold such conversations over a dinner table though 
Ahhh. But has the Queen’s power actually been “limited” or “curtailed” legally? Or is it more true that royal power/authority still exists but simply hasn’t been excercized in a the last few generations? What would be the reaction (either the Legal reaction or the public reaction) if she decided to exercise a simple royal prerogative such as a royal pardon for an offender? Bear in mind I mean if the offense and pardon were of a non political nature as it’s quite obvious that a political one would likely bring instant condemnation.
I just wanted to congratulate the British people, and some of you guys bring such negativity? Why?
I have no axe to grind with the royal family, I am the self proclaimed Duke of Auchenshogle, and I have my subjects polish my grey Fergie before any state visits.
What about you and the other living there buy the paint, some brushes and do the work yourself?
Not so difficult, is it?
Do you have to wait for somebody else to do the job?
You can paint lamp posts in a kilt too.......
Put the paint can in the sporran, and you are good to do some honest work!
Put the paint can in the sporran, and you are good to do some honest work!
The amount of Malt I have drunk gives you enough money to employ some Poles if you feel too lazy this life.
Another benefit is that you will know it will be done properly.
Don't go there please. If you can't or don't understand humour, keep your fingers off the keyboard.
I do understand humor, but not insults.
May I suggest you start an own thread where you can humor us?
I started this one, so you keep away with your 'humor' please!
May I suggest you start an own thread where you can humor us?
I started this one, so you keep away with your 'humor' please!
Ha ha. Coincidence is strange. My two Polish friends who I'm having a coffee and a chat with are a bit perplexed at your previous post, and don't find it very funny. Perhaps you could explain it to them. They appear to believe you are poking fun at their nationality for providing cheap labour, and being easily exploited by lazy Scotsmen. I shall refrain from any further involvement in your "humourous" post, and practice what I preach by keeping my fingers off the keyboard. I'm sure your response will be both erudite and concise.
Have a nice day.
Last edited:
Congratulations, Deekin, to a beautiful new member of your Royal family!
Sir Archie von Battenberg-Windsor ?
Sir Archie von Battenberg-Windsor ?
Similar threads
