People moaning about the Royal Baby

margaretclare

kwmlondon wrote: »

Yeah, but you're not. You - like every other person in the UK, is a subject of the queen. Any rights you have are purely at the sufferance of the monarch.

I really wish we could have a relationship with our royal family a bit more like the continental monarchs. Stop treating them like they are expected to be any better or worse than any of us, making ridiculous demands of them and imposing horrific conditions on them. Just have some people who represent a tradition and history we can celebrate, remove the connection between monarch and church and let them have some kind of normal life and stop making such a fuss about them.

I'm sure they are nice enough, it's just that either they are special people, appointed by god to rule over us and are our betters and masters, or they are just people like you and me who were born into a certain family. If it's the latter lets get over them a bit and give them a life, for goodness sake.

It's the latter.

If you read a little history you find out that the monarchy was only restored after the Civil War and the Protectorship, on condition that Charles II would NOT seek to reclaim the 'divine right of kings' to which his father had aspired, and would adhere to the will of Parliament. This was in the Declaration of Breda and it was the only way the monarchy was brought back. If you read a bit further back and you look at some of the characters who became king, you wonder how on earth could any God have had a hand in it. William I for a start, what he did to the cities in France that he conquered, and then here in England. Some, to bolster their shaky claim to the throne, actually claimed descent from mythical characters. Henry VII did that. A whole new line of descent from King Arthur was manufactured for him. And so on.

I have nothing against any of these people but I just cannot get enthused about any of it. For some people, it may point up a sharper agony in their own lives. Broken families. People who can't have children. People who have descendants but don't see them. And so on.

I'm glad about 2 things: (1) the couple got married before having children and (2) they didn't conceive little George immediately after the wedding. Don't ask me why I think those 2 things matter. Just put it down to my generation. BTW George is unlikely to be 'my' king (see: 'our future king' etc). I shan't be here by the time his great-grandmother, grandfather and father have passed to the crown to the next in line.

Errata

kwmlondon wrote: »

Yeah, but you're not. You - like every other person in the UK, is a subject of the queen. Any rights you have are purely at the sufferance of the monarch.

I really wish we could have a relationship with our royal family a bit more like the continental monarchs. Stop treating them like they are expected to be any better or worse than any of us, making ridiculous demands of them and imposing horrific conditions on them. Just have some people who represent a tradition and history we can celebrate, remove the connection between monarch and church and let them have some kind of normal life and stop making such a fuss about them.

I'm sure they are nice enough, it's just that either they are special people, appointed by god to rule over us and are our betters and masters, or they are just people like you and me who were born into a certain family. If it's the latter lets get over them a bit and give them a life, for goodness sake.

The British monarchy can't be remotely like the continental monarchys because it's become a global phenomenan. I'm afraid we're stuck with it as it is for the time being, and if anyone thinks Di mania was too much, wait until Kate hits her stride.

pollypenny

I'm with kmwlondon on wishes, but have to agree with Errata that it's unlikely to happen.

Too many sycophants in this country! :cool:

Lamb86

19lottie82 wrote: »

The Royal Family costs the tax payer about £33 million a year (62p a person?), and generates £500milion from tourism, which leads to an extra £176million for the UK treasury, so that's not really true, is it?

It really gets my goat when people say "It's me who's paying for them", when they don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Agree with this completely!

Lou67

19lottie82 wrote: »

The Royal Family costs the tax payer about £33 million a year (62p a person?), and generates £500milion from tourism, which leads to an extra £176million for the UK treasury, so that's not really true, is it?

It really gets my goat when people say "It's me who's paying for them", when they don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Ha ha :rotfl: Great post Lottie! And you got SIXTY thanks. Don't see any Royal family bashers posts getting that many!!! Oh dear

Funky_Bold_Ribena

Lou67 wrote: »

Ha ha :rotfl: Great post Lottie! And you got SIXTY thanks. Don't see any Royal family bashers posts getting that many!!! Oh dear

Are you still harping on about this non-event? Get a life!

paulineb_2

Im not anyones subject thank you.

What a lot of forelock tugging nonsense

I spent 20 years at the sharp end working with homeless people and addicts

And when william sleeps outside at centrepoint for one night its like a big deal

Seriously, some people really need to get a life

Oh and as I said before Ive friends who are royalists

But lets not kid ourselves on that they do hard work

Ive worked with people with mental health problems who have tried to kill themselves in front of me, for 20 grand a year

Cutting a ribbon doesnt really compare

And get rid of air miles andy and the hangers on

Andys daughters apparently dont need police protection anymore but hes been fighting for that

Come on, so much suffering on earth and all people care about is Kate and William and anyone who isnt a royalist is a bad person

How sad, how terribly sad.

moneysaymoneydo

I agree Lottie congratulations to William & Kate with baby Prince George a future king of Britain.

Lizzie-S

19lottie82 wrote: »

The Royal Family costs the tax payer about £33 million a year (62p a person?), and generates £500milion from tourism, which leads to an extra £176million for the UK treasury, so that's not really true, is it?

It really gets my goat when people say "It's me who's paying for them", when they don't have a clue what they're talking about.

Also agree. Good post. :T:T:T

Lizzie-S

Funky_Bold_Ribena wrote: »

Are you still harping on about this non-event? Get a life!

Nobody is 'harping on' any more than YOU are.

And hello: The FUTURE KING of this country being born is a non-event?! So tell me, what do YOU class as an important and newsworthy item?

Can't wait to hear this!