In spite of these austere time lets give the Queen a new yacht

latenia

getz wrote: »

some people want believe anything,you know if you are on the roman walls of chester at dusk,and you see a welshman you are allowed to shoot him with a bow and arrow,also the isle of mann is still at war with russia,is does meen you can act on them,

So which part of my post is untrue?

getz

KeithAFC wrote: »

Really?

honest ,the country is full of eccentric and not repealed laws[i think fred knows a few]

getz

latenia wrote: »

So which part of my post is untrue?

its a royal tradition to say those things[going right back to 1066]but you dont believe he had her pussy checked do you ?well maybe you do

ejmaztec

getz wrote: »

some people want believe anything,you know if you are on the roman walls of chester at dusk,and you see a welshman you are allowed to shoot him with a bow and arrow,also the isle of mann is still at war with russia,is does meen you can act on them,

How would you know that he was a Welshman if he wasn't singing and waving a leek?

jonnyfingers

ejmaztec wrote: »

How would you know that he was a Welshman if he wasn't singing and waving a leek?

The sheep he's shagging is a dead giveaway.

ejmaztec

jonnyfingers wrote: »

The sheep he's shagging is a dead giveaway.

He could be from Chipping Norton.

Ellis Dee

latenia wrote: »

I just feel really sorry for British people who are so deeply brainwashed that they think having a monarch is a good thing. It's nothing more than a multi-billion pound scam. How many are aware that Kate Middleton was a (vaginal?)virgin until her wedding night and that this archaic requirement would have been dictated by senior members of the royal family?
Following the embarrassment caused to Diana by having a public declaration of her virginity made before her wedding to Charles they kept quieter this time around but if Will had managed to knock her up before the wedding that would have been the entire racket down the swanee.

How did they check the virginity thing? Did Phil the Greek get to give Kate a fingering, while the aul Windsor wan looked on? "Yes, Lilbeth, the hymen's quite intact. I just hope Wills isn't a queer. Golly, this is giving me rather a stiffy. Ho, ho, ho!":D:D

Today's Guardian has an interesting piece with examples of what you could get for the £60 million that the royal yacht would cost.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/interactive/2012/jan/16/royal-yacht-gove-money-interactive

getz

ejmaztec wrote: »

How would you know that he was a Welshman if he wasn't singing and waving a leek?

in them days you would shout at him in latin if he could not understand, or had a rugby shirt on ,let him have it

ejmaztec

getz wrote: »

in them days you would shout at him in latin if he could not understand, or had a rugby shirt on ,let him have it

What if he was deaf and rugby shirts hadn't been invented?

getz

ejmaztec wrote: »

What if he was deaf and rugby shirts hadn't been invented?

shoot him anyway,it might be a mad irishman trying to capture that patrick chap

mike65

jonnyfingers wrote: »

Scanned most of the thread and didn't see it but I presume someone pointed out that this proposed new yacht will be privately funded so won't cost the British tax payer anything. Also it will be mainly used for training young people on all things sailing related. Lizzie will just have a few private cabins in it and can use it from time to time.

I doubt anyone here knows that somehow!

partyatmygaff

KeithAFC wrote:

I agree Bwatson. I think the Royal wedding was brilliant. We celebrated it and it was a great time to be British.

What a remarkable sight.

Taxpayers have their hard earned money taken from them to pay for the extravagant lifestyle, pomp and possessions of their nepotist rulers and it makes them proud. Watching the self-appointed family of state leeches using public funds to hold a party is somehow a cause for celebration.

Enjoy being a "commoner" and ensuring the survival of a completely unmerited hereditary "Royal class".

Solair

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Shouldn't this be in the "You laugh you lose" board???

93% of primary schools run by the Catholic Church.
The state broadcaster plays the Angelus at 6pm every day.
The sale of Alcohol is banned on Good Friday.

Yep, sounds like a secular republic to me.

If you actually read my post, rather than just quoting it selectively to suit your argument, you would see that I did not say that the Republic of Ireland was perfect and actually said that there were a lot of hangovers from the dark ages of Dev. and McQuaid who in my opinion actually undermined the very concept of a Republic by what they did.

I am not arguing that the Republic of Ireland's a perfect model. It has huge flaws that, in my opinion, need to be corrected by constitutional amendments and secularisation of the primary and secondary education systems.
It's far from a perfect example of what a secular Republic should be.

However, that does not take away from the argument that the British monarchy system takes screwy to a whole other level entirely i.e. by institutionalising a state religion, placing bishops in the upper house of the leglsiature, landed gentry, hereditary peers etc etc..

Basically, it's still the same medieval system of Government with the addition of a modern parliamentary and courts system.

The lack of secularity in the system is not the biggest flaw. It's the lack of democracy in the upper house, the monarchy, and the whole system of landed aristocrats and inherited legal and financial privilege that is a little weird.

It really should be reduced to something purely ceremonial at this stage and the House of Lords totally reformed and replaced with something elected.

Freddie59

KeithAFC wrote: »

It isn't a secular republic. Anyone who thinks it is wrong.

Maybe not. But at least we're not taking it up the ass without any lube from a "royal" family.:D While idiots bow and scrape to them.

Chuck Stone

The British Royals were chosen by God to the Brit's No 1 welfare family.

KeithAFC

Freddie59 wrote: »

Maybe not. But at least we're not taking it up the ass without any lube from a "royal" family.:D While idiots bow and scrape to them.

I enjoy the pomp and ceremony and respect many who are part of the Royal family. If that is sad to you, that is ok.

getz

Freddie59 wrote: »

Maybe not. But at least we're not taking it up the ass without any lube from a "royal" family.:D While idiots bow and scrape to them.

you dont need a royal family,you have banks and a church to do that

al28283

Let's = Let us.

But it's not us giving her a yacht

Solair

No, but the banks are currently screwing the whole world financial system at the moment.

LordSutch

latenia wrote: »

I just feel really sorry for British people who are so deeply brainwashed that they think having a monarch is a good thing. It's nothing more than a multi-billion pound scam.

Not a fan of the Royals I take it :rolleyes:

partyatmygaff

KeithAFC wrote: »

I enjoy the pomp and ceremony and respect many who are part of the Royal family. If that is sad to you, that is ok.

Do you also enjoy being one of the many "lowly commoners" charged with paying for their pomp and extravagant lifestyle?

Solair

I wonder did Thatcher ever consider selling her off to Disney Corp back in the 80s?

KeithAFC

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Do you also enjoy being one of the many "lowly commoners" charged with paying for their pomp and extravagant lifestyle?

Yes. What is the big deal?

getz

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Do you also enjoy being one of the many "lowly commoners" charged with paying for their pomp and extravagant lifestyle?

i dont mind paying my 62 pence per year to keep them,its better than wasting money on euro countries ,who seem to be incapable of running their own economies,

getz

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Do you also enjoy being one of the many "lowly commoners" charged with paying for their pomp and extravagant lifestyle?

i dont mind paying my 62 pence per year to keep a royal family, but i do mind paying out to prop up the euro countries,because they cannot run their own economy ,because of their passed extravagant lifestyle

partyatmygaff

KeithAFC wrote: »

Yes. What is the big deal?

Nothing.

Anyway, while you're being so generous, can I have some of your money? As of today, I am the King of Northern Ireland. Seeing as I have no merit to be King, I am of equal standing to any member of the British Royal Family.

getz wrote: »

i dont mind paying my 62 pence per year to keep them,its better than wasting money on euro countries ,who seem to be incapable of running their own economies,

This is not about any country within the Eurozone nor about the economy. It's about the absurdity of British taxpayers paying even one pence to ensure the survival of a superior "Royal Class" who consider those taxpayers who fund their existence as being lower class "commoners". As far as i'm concerned, they have no merit to warrant their position in society. Not all traditions should be kept on.

KeithAFC

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Nothing.

Anyway, while you're being so generous, can I have some of your money? As of today, I am the King of Northern Ireland. Seeing as I have no merit to be King, I am of equal standing to any member of the British Royal Family.


This is not about any country within the Eurozone nor about the economy. It's about the absurdity of British taxpayers paying even one pence to ensure the survival of a superior "Royal Class" who consider those taxpayers who fund their existence as being lower class "commoners". As far as i'm concerned, they have no merit to warrant their position in society. Not all traditions should be kept on.

No. William will be our next king. So there would be no point in paying you to be our king.

Fratton Fred

Solair wrote: »

If you actually read my post, rather than just quoting it selectively to suit your argument, you would see that I did not say that the Republic of Ireland was perfect and actually said that there were a lot of hangovers from the dark ages of Dev. and McQuaid who in my opinion actually undermined the very concept of a Republic by what they did.

I am not arguing that the Republic of Ireland's a perfect model. It has huge flaws that, in my opinion, need to be corrected by constitutional amendments and secularisation of the primary and secondary education systems.
It's far from a perfect example of what a secular Republic should be.

However, that does not take away from the argument that the British monarchy system takes screwy to a whole other level entirely i.e. by institutionalising a state religion, placing bishops in the upper house of the leglsiature, landed gentry, hereditary peers etc etc..

Basically, it's still the same medieval system of Government with the addition of a modern parliamentary and courts system.

The lack of secularity in the system is not the biggest flaw. It's the lack of democracy in the upper house, the monarchy, and the whole system of landed aristocrats and inherited legal and financial privilege that is a little weird.

It really should be reduced to something purely ceremonial at this stage and the House of Lords totally reformed and replaced with something elected.

You might want to check out Tony Blair's reform of the Lords.

You're right though, a lot needs to change and the separation of "The Church" and the state is already under discussion.

As for the Royals, it is a system that works and changing it to a system like Ireland's is a lot of hassle for relatively little gain.

A British president would still have all the security that a monarch does and when you chuck in pensions etc, is it any cheaper?

getz

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Nothing.

Anyway, while you're being so generous, can I have some of your money? As of today, I am the King of Northern Ireland. Seeing as I have no merit to be King, I am of equal standing to any member of the British Royal Family.


This is not about any country within the Eurozone nor about the economy. It's about the absurdity of British taxpayers paying even one pence to ensure the survival of a superior "Royal Class" who consider those taxpayers who fund their existence as being lower class "commoners". As far as i'm concerned, they have no merit to warrant their position in society. Not all traditions should be kept on.

30% of the words population say different and thats just those within the commonwealth,

ejmaztec

KeithAFC wrote: »

No. William will be our next king. So there would be no point in paying you to be our king.

Wouldn't it be ironic for the next King Billy to witness the formation of a united Ireland?




:pac: